What do you think?
Rate this book
Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19
Chan and Ridley write with an urgency...that inspires gripping depictions of what viruses are, how infectious-disease laboratories work and wonderfully lucid descriptions of bats. . . . They powerfully recount how dangerous pathogens can both leak from a lab and emerge in nature. (New York Times Book Review)
Understanding how Covid-19 started is crucial for the future of humankind. Viral is the most incisive and authoritative book about the search for the source of the virus.
A new virus descended on the human species in 2019 wreaking unprecedented havoc. Finding out where it came from and how it first jumped into people is an urgent priority, but early expectations that this would prove an easy question to answer have been dashed. Nearly two years into the pandemic, the crucial mystery of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is not only unresolved but has deepened.
In this uniquely insightful book, a scientist and a writer join forces to try to get to the bottom of how a virus whose closest relations live in bats in subtropical southern China somehow managed to begin spreading among people more than 1,500 kilometres away in the city of Wuhan. They grapple with the baffling fact that the virus left none of the expected traces that such outbreaks usually create: no infected market animals or wildlife, no chains of early cases in travellers to the city, no smouldering epidemic in a rural area, no rapid adaptation of the virus to its new host--human beings.
To try to solve this pressing mystery, Viral delves deep into the events of 2019 leading up to 2021, the details of what went on in animal markets and virology laboratories, the records and data hidden from sight within archived Chinese theses and websites, and the clues that can be coaxed from the very text of the virus's own genetic code.
The result is a gripping detective story that takes the reader deeper and deeper into a metaphorical cave of mystery. One by one the authors explore promising tunnels only to show that they are blind alleys, until, miles beneath the surface, they find themselves tantalisingly close to a shaft that leads to the light.
Understanding how Covid-19 started is crucial for the future of humankind. Viral is the most incisive and authoritative book about the search for the source of the virus.
A new virus descended on the human species in 2019 wreaking unprecedented havoc. Finding out where it came from and how it first jumped into people is an urgent priority, but early expectations that this would prove an easy question to answer have been dashed. Nearly two years into the pandemic, the crucial mystery of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is not only unresolved but has deepened.
In this uniquely insightful book, a scientist and a writer join forces to try to get to the bottom of how a virus whose closest relations live in bats in subtropical southern China somehow managed to begin spreading among people more than 1,500 kilometres away in the city of Wuhan. They grapple with the baffling fact that the virus left none of the expected traces that such outbreaks usually create: no infected market animals or wildlife, no chains of early cases in travellers to the city, no smouldering epidemic in a rural area, no rapid adaptation of the virus to its new host--human beings.
To try to solve this pressing mystery, Viral delves deep into the events of 2019 leading up to 2021, the details of what went on in animal markets and virology laboratories, the records and data hidden from sight within archived Chinese theses and websites, and the clues that can be coaxed from the very text of the virus's own genetic code.
The result is a gripping detective story that takes the reader deeper and deeper into a metaphorical cave of mystery. One by one the authors explore promising tunnels only to show that they are blind alleys, until, miles beneath the surface, they find themselves tantalisingly close to a shaft that leads to the light.
448 pages, Paperback
First published November 16, 2021
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 209 reviews
June 6, 2022
How serendipitous that this book became available from the library as I’m home recovering from Covid, my souvenir of a trip overseas. (Thankfully, a mild case). Yep, I avoided it for 2+ years despite babysitting for my little germ-carriers...er, grandchildren.....I had to go overseas to get it...and now I'm missing our planned trip to the mountains.
So, it was with much interest that I dove into this book. Here we are, 2+ years into the pandemic, and there are still more questions than answers. Co-author Alina Chan is a Canadian molecular biologist specializing in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, where she is a postdoctoral fellow. Her fellow co-author is a journalist.
What this is not is a conspiracy theory book. Nor is it a political book. What it is, is a scientific book. Alina Chan shares the evidence supporting theories that suggest either a naturally occurring virus in animals or a lab origin source of the virus, while debunking misinformation. The author’s objective? A transparent, objective, and independent investigation into the source of the virus.
The book is also a fascinating, and sometimes frightening, look into the worldwide scientific work and research into viruses, as well as exploring the nature of a virus and why naturally occurring viruses are more prevalent today.
Shockingly, this book has stirred the ire of government agencies, some scientists, and many in the media. One has to ask why, when, apparently, the book has been fact checked, and nothing has been found to be in error. I’ve read some of the negative reviews in the press and they leave me mystified and wondering if they actually read the book.
The authors do not draw a definitive conclusion as to the virus’s origin, as there is no direct evidence for either of the theories. The authors do not suggest anything was deliberate. No conspiracy theories here. This book is a call for an in-depth scientific investigation, and largely due to Ms Chan’s dogged determination and her challenging the status quo on her Twitter feed (which, in itself, is fascinating reading), the scientific consensus is shifting.
In May, President Biden ordered a new investigation into the origin of the virus: “The United States will also keep working with like-minded partners around the world to press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based international investigation and to provide access to all relevant data and evidence.”
If only there had been such transparency and cooperation from the beginning.
A must-read for everyone. The narrator of the audiobook was excellent!
*Half of the earnings on the sale of the book will be donated to charity, including, but not limited to health care workers, covid relief, and medical research.
So, it was with much interest that I dove into this book. Here we are, 2+ years into the pandemic, and there are still more questions than answers. Co-author Alina Chan is a Canadian molecular biologist specializing in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, where she is a postdoctoral fellow. Her fellow co-author is a journalist.
What this is not is a conspiracy theory book. Nor is it a political book. What it is, is a scientific book. Alina Chan shares the evidence supporting theories that suggest either a naturally occurring virus in animals or a lab origin source of the virus, while debunking misinformation. The author’s objective? A transparent, objective, and independent investigation into the source of the virus.
The book is also a fascinating, and sometimes frightening, look into the worldwide scientific work and research into viruses, as well as exploring the nature of a virus and why naturally occurring viruses are more prevalent today.
Shockingly, this book has stirred the ire of government agencies, some scientists, and many in the media. One has to ask why, when, apparently, the book has been fact checked, and nothing has been found to be in error. I’ve read some of the negative reviews in the press and they leave me mystified and wondering if they actually read the book.
The authors do not draw a definitive conclusion as to the virus’s origin, as there is no direct evidence for either of the theories. The authors do not suggest anything was deliberate. No conspiracy theories here. This book is a call for an in-depth scientific investigation, and largely due to Ms Chan’s dogged determination and her challenging the status quo on her Twitter feed (which, in itself, is fascinating reading), the scientific consensus is shifting.
In May, President Biden ordered a new investigation into the origin of the virus: “The United States will also keep working with like-minded partners around the world to press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based international investigation and to provide access to all relevant data and evidence.”
If only there had been such transparency and cooperation from the beginning.
A must-read for everyone. The narrator of the audiobook was excellent!
*Half of the earnings on the sale of the book will be donated to charity, including, but not limited to health care workers, covid relief, and medical research.
December 29, 2021
First of all, there is no ‘smoking gun’ revelation in this book. I was startled to realise by the end (at the 65% mark of the Kindle version) that everything relayed by Alina Chan and Matt Ridley is common knowledge, especially if you have been following all of the debates, exposures and revelations on Twitter. I must say that what this book does do very well is collate the wide swathe of this information, scattered as it has been over two years now, and present it in a highly readable, lucid and quite damning account.
What has been established is that six miners fell mysteriously ill in 2012 after removing bat guano in Mojiang. They succumbed to RaTG13, the sarbecovirus sample taken from the copper mine in 2013. This sample was sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which subsequently discovered eight other sarbecoviruses at the mine, representing a previously unknown virus family.
The full genome of RaTG13 was sequenced by 2018. SARS-CoV-2, or Covid-19, was first detected in Wuhan in late 2019, with Lancet reporting that the first coronavirus case was clinically diagnosed on 1 December 2019.
The first SARS-CoV-2 genome was obtained on 27 December 2019, with whistle-blowers at Wuhan Central Hospital sounding the alarm about human-to-human transmission on 30 December 2019. This resulted in a Chinese crackdown on 1 January 2020, with whistle-blower Dr. Li Wenliang (who subsequently died from Covid-19) being interrogated by Chinese police and forced to sign a ‘confession to wrongdoing’.
At this point, all patient samples were ordered destroyed by the Chinese, while Sinopharm was given the go-ahead to start to develop a vaccine. Dr. Zhang Yongzhen uploaded the SARS-CoV-2 genome to the international GenBank database on 7 January 2020. This was initially embargoed until July, can you believe it, but following Dr. Zhang’s 7 January Nature paper, the genome was posted online.
Meanwhile, on 13 January 2020 we had the first Covid-19 case outside of China, a traveller from Wuhan to Thailand. On 14 January 2020, the WHO announced that China had found “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission”. This was, indeed, confirmed by the Chinese government itself on 20 January 2020, with Wuhan going into lockdown on 23 January 2020.
It is quite chilling to read the following passage:
As people around the world watched the drastic measures being taken in Wuhan and other cities in Hubei – emergency hospitals erected at unimaginable speed, cases forcibly isolated in special centres, fifty-six million people locked into their homes for more than two months under harsh restrictions and enforcement – they experienced a mix of envy and horror at the unchallenged power of a totalitarian state to contain a virus outbreak. Few of us realised what was in store for the world.
Despite this now indisputable chain of events, China went to extraordinary measures to conceal the case of the six miners and the very existence of RaTG13. If this was indeed sequenced as early as 2018 – some even suggest 2017 – it could have given the world a heads-up well before Covid-19 became a global pandemic.
What’s more, little to nothing is known of the eight other sarbecoviruses discovered at Mojiang. What is also not known is what transpired between the samples being submitted to the WIV and the eventual outbreak of Covid-19. China has gone to extraordinary measures to restrict access to the mine, with the WHO recently given a highly-sanitised tour of the WIV to reassure an increasingly nervous world that it was not an engineered bioweapon nor the result of an accidental lab leak.
Complicating the picture is the ‘gain of function’ research that the US embarked upon, in conjunction with the WIV, which even received funding from the US itself in this regard. Here the authors, quite rightfully, state that “More voices are calling for a systematic and transparent review of the crucial information that exists outside of China”. This is a veiled reference to the EcoHealth Alliance, which has “closely collaborated with the WIV on the surveillance of bat viruses for many years …”
So can we figure out exactly what happened? Clearly much of China’s obfuscation has been the kneejerk reaction of a totalitarian state unused to the demands of scientific transparency and the swift action needed in the face of such a global crisis. “The reader may want to know what the authors of this book think happened. Of course, we do not know for sure.” This is quickly followed by: “However, we now think it very possible that the pandemic did result from the work of scientists either when collecting samples in the field or when working with those samples in a laboratory.”
Fair enough. The authors do provide a chilling account of accidents and mishaps in BSL 4-level labs, so such a scenario is entirely plausible. But I think it is a step too far to declare that “… the current circumstances and the sparse evidence available demand that natural and laboratory-based origins are both treated as likely.” Prior to this statement, there is the below passage in the book:
One concern, expressed by Alina in a tweet after the press conference, was that the handling of the investigation showed the world that a country could get a free pass if a virus escaped from one its laboratories so long as it took care to give outsiders access to records and data, but simply asserted that all was well.
This statement really jumped out at me, because here the authors clearly take sides in the debate. Their stance is hinted at subtly throughout the book, before it becomes as overtly polemical as the above quote. Much earlier on: “We think – as Alina said on Twitter in May 2020 – ‘there is zero evidence that confirms that the SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 PRRA(R) FCS arose naturally or artificially, but neither scenario can be ruled out.”
The book concludes with two speculative chapters outlining a defence case for and against the lab-leak hypothesis. This seems to give the authors licence to go full conspiracy theory, with such alarming statements as: “… there is no direct evidence of a natural origin of the Covid-19 pandemic.” Plus: “… there has been no explanation of how it came to be so adept at spreading among humans.”
One would think that after setting up the entire book as a mea culpa case for the lab-leak theory, the authors would stick to their guns, but the final chapter contains this back-tracking gem: “But why should the burden of proof be with those who posit a laboratory leak? True, there has been no major pandemic caused by a laboratory leak, so it would be a first.”
More alarming and insidious, however, is the statement below:
Long articles by journalists Nathan Robinson in Current Affiars and Donald McNeil Jr in Medium both made the argument that the political left had been too quick to dismiss the possibility of a laboratory leak. ‘I have often warned that liberals and leftists should be careful not to assume conservatives are always wrong about facts’ …
I was curious as to whether or not my reaction to this book was reflected in other reviews. This from The Washington Post:
One of the things a good professional scientist does is take his or her cherished hypothesis and try to break it every which way, by conducting experiments or hunting for data that does not agree with it. This is a way to avoid confirmation bias, the natural human tendency to hear what we want to hear and disregard the rest. A key property of scientific theories is that they can be proved wrong. Unfortunately, it is hard to imagine such evidence that would convince strong partisans of either laboratory or natural origins. And too much of “Viral” is made up of confirmation bias. Nobody should mistake this book for an evenhanded scientific document.
What has been established is that six miners fell mysteriously ill in 2012 after removing bat guano in Mojiang. They succumbed to RaTG13, the sarbecovirus sample taken from the copper mine in 2013. This sample was sent to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which subsequently discovered eight other sarbecoviruses at the mine, representing a previously unknown virus family.
The full genome of RaTG13 was sequenced by 2018. SARS-CoV-2, or Covid-19, was first detected in Wuhan in late 2019, with Lancet reporting that the first coronavirus case was clinically diagnosed on 1 December 2019.
The first SARS-CoV-2 genome was obtained on 27 December 2019, with whistle-blowers at Wuhan Central Hospital sounding the alarm about human-to-human transmission on 30 December 2019. This resulted in a Chinese crackdown on 1 January 2020, with whistle-blower Dr. Li Wenliang (who subsequently died from Covid-19) being interrogated by Chinese police and forced to sign a ‘confession to wrongdoing’.
At this point, all patient samples were ordered destroyed by the Chinese, while Sinopharm was given the go-ahead to start to develop a vaccine. Dr. Zhang Yongzhen uploaded the SARS-CoV-2 genome to the international GenBank database on 7 January 2020. This was initially embargoed until July, can you believe it, but following Dr. Zhang’s 7 January Nature paper, the genome was posted online.
Meanwhile, on 13 January 2020 we had the first Covid-19 case outside of China, a traveller from Wuhan to Thailand. On 14 January 2020, the WHO announced that China had found “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission”. This was, indeed, confirmed by the Chinese government itself on 20 January 2020, with Wuhan going into lockdown on 23 January 2020.
It is quite chilling to read the following passage:
As people around the world watched the drastic measures being taken in Wuhan and other cities in Hubei – emergency hospitals erected at unimaginable speed, cases forcibly isolated in special centres, fifty-six million people locked into their homes for more than two months under harsh restrictions and enforcement – they experienced a mix of envy and horror at the unchallenged power of a totalitarian state to contain a virus outbreak. Few of us realised what was in store for the world.
Despite this now indisputable chain of events, China went to extraordinary measures to conceal the case of the six miners and the very existence of RaTG13. If this was indeed sequenced as early as 2018 – some even suggest 2017 – it could have given the world a heads-up well before Covid-19 became a global pandemic.
What’s more, little to nothing is known of the eight other sarbecoviruses discovered at Mojiang. What is also not known is what transpired between the samples being submitted to the WIV and the eventual outbreak of Covid-19. China has gone to extraordinary measures to restrict access to the mine, with the WHO recently given a highly-sanitised tour of the WIV to reassure an increasingly nervous world that it was not an engineered bioweapon nor the result of an accidental lab leak.
Complicating the picture is the ‘gain of function’ research that the US embarked upon, in conjunction with the WIV, which even received funding from the US itself in this regard. Here the authors, quite rightfully, state that “More voices are calling for a systematic and transparent review of the crucial information that exists outside of China”. This is a veiled reference to the EcoHealth Alliance, which has “closely collaborated with the WIV on the surveillance of bat viruses for many years …”
So can we figure out exactly what happened? Clearly much of China’s obfuscation has been the kneejerk reaction of a totalitarian state unused to the demands of scientific transparency and the swift action needed in the face of such a global crisis. “The reader may want to know what the authors of this book think happened. Of course, we do not know for sure.” This is quickly followed by: “However, we now think it very possible that the pandemic did result from the work of scientists either when collecting samples in the field or when working with those samples in a laboratory.”
Fair enough. The authors do provide a chilling account of accidents and mishaps in BSL 4-level labs, so such a scenario is entirely plausible. But I think it is a step too far to declare that “… the current circumstances and the sparse evidence available demand that natural and laboratory-based origins are both treated as likely.” Prior to this statement, there is the below passage in the book:
One concern, expressed by Alina in a tweet after the press conference, was that the handling of the investigation showed the world that a country could get a free pass if a virus escaped from one its laboratories so long as it took care to give outsiders access to records and data, but simply asserted that all was well.
This statement really jumped out at me, because here the authors clearly take sides in the debate. Their stance is hinted at subtly throughout the book, before it becomes as overtly polemical as the above quote. Much earlier on: “We think – as Alina said on Twitter in May 2020 – ‘there is zero evidence that confirms that the SARS-CoV-2 S1/S2 PRRA(R) FCS arose naturally or artificially, but neither scenario can be ruled out.”
The book concludes with two speculative chapters outlining a defence case for and against the lab-leak hypothesis. This seems to give the authors licence to go full conspiracy theory, with such alarming statements as: “… there is no direct evidence of a natural origin of the Covid-19 pandemic.” Plus: “… there has been no explanation of how it came to be so adept at spreading among humans.”
One would think that after setting up the entire book as a mea culpa case for the lab-leak theory, the authors would stick to their guns, but the final chapter contains this back-tracking gem: “But why should the burden of proof be with those who posit a laboratory leak? True, there has been no major pandemic caused by a laboratory leak, so it would be a first.”
More alarming and insidious, however, is the statement below:
Long articles by journalists Nathan Robinson in Current Affiars and Donald McNeil Jr in Medium both made the argument that the political left had been too quick to dismiss the possibility of a laboratory leak. ‘I have often warned that liberals and leftists should be careful not to assume conservatives are always wrong about facts’ …
I was curious as to whether or not my reaction to this book was reflected in other reviews. This from The Washington Post:
One of the things a good professional scientist does is take his or her cherished hypothesis and try to break it every which way, by conducting experiments or hunting for data that does not agree with it. This is a way to avoid confirmation bias, the natural human tendency to hear what we want to hear and disregard the rest. A key property of scientific theories is that they can be proved wrong. Unfortunately, it is hard to imagine such evidence that would convince strong partisans of either laboratory or natural origins. And too much of “Viral” is made up of confirmation bias. Nobody should mistake this book for an evenhanded scientific document.
April 29, 2022
A fascinating, real life detective story searching for the origin of SARS-CoV-2
I've been hesitant to read books concerning the origin of the virus that caused the pandemic because there are so many conspiracy theories. I don't trust just anyone to write a factual book about where this virus came from. I only want to hear what scientists in the fields of virology, epidemiology, genomics, and similar have to say.
Co-author of this book, Alina Chan, is a molecular biologist who specializes in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. She and two colleagues were the first to publish a paper observing that "by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV."
In this book, she and journalist Matt Ridley write about her and others findings about the virus. They explore various hypotheses about its origin, discussing how likely or unlikely they are.
I am surprised to learn how deeply China obfuscated information, perhaps preventing the world from ever finding the origin.
There is a lot of science (virology and genomics) in this book but it is written in a way that is accessible to the layperson. I was fascinated to learn more about viruses, coronaviruses in particular. Equally fascinating (and terrifying) is gain of function research. I was interested to learn about furin cleavage sites, what it is and why it increases infectivity of the virus.
There's so much I could write about - I made 58 highlights - but it's better for anyone interested to read the book, not my interpretation of it.
I appreciate that the authors did not let politics dictate what they say about the possible, even probable, origin of the pandemic.
I also appreciate that they did not give a definitive answer, which would have been unscientific without proof..... proof that might never be found. Instead, they point out what seems the most likely scenario and why, and one I'm inclined to agree with after reading this book.
CW: There is animal experimentation in this book and, though not graphic, it is disturbing and might be too much for some readers.
I've been hesitant to read books concerning the origin of the virus that caused the pandemic because there are so many conspiracy theories. I don't trust just anyone to write a factual book about where this virus came from. I only want to hear what scientists in the fields of virology, epidemiology, genomics, and similar have to say.
Co-author of this book, Alina Chan, is a molecular biologist who specializes in gene therapy and cell engineering at the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard. She and two colleagues were the first to publish a paper observing that "by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV."
In this book, she and journalist Matt Ridley write about her and others findings about the virus. They explore various hypotheses about its origin, discussing how likely or unlikely they are.
I am surprised to learn how deeply China obfuscated information, perhaps preventing the world from ever finding the origin.
There is a lot of science (virology and genomics) in this book but it is written in a way that is accessible to the layperson. I was fascinated to learn more about viruses, coronaviruses in particular. Equally fascinating (and terrifying) is gain of function research. I was interested to learn about furin cleavage sites, what it is and why it increases infectivity of the virus.
There's so much I could write about - I made 58 highlights - but it's better for anyone interested to read the book, not my interpretation of it.
I appreciate that the authors did not let politics dictate what they say about the possible, even probable, origin of the pandemic.
I also appreciate that they did not give a definitive answer, which would have been unscientific without proof..... proof that might never be found. Instead, they point out what seems the most likely scenario and why, and one I'm inclined to agree with after reading this book.
CW: There is animal experimentation in this book and, though not graphic, it is disturbing and might be too much for some readers.
December 16, 2021
Frankensteined, Just leaked or Natural?
In the early months of 2020, as the world dragged itself into a pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, the now famous biologist Alina Chan was doing some serious work. She discovered that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, “it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV.” Moreover, it was “evolving more slowly than one newly arrived in the human species from another animal normally would”, implying that SARS-CoV-2 “was already well-adapted to human beings from the moment it was first detected in Wuhan in December 2019.” Top scientists in the field had early coalesced around the idea that SARS-CoV-2 was far more likely zoonotic than anything that leaked from a laboratory.
Virologists took note of Alina Chan’s conclusions and moved on. Non-experts by and large followed suit, but not co-author Matt Ridley. A lifelong science writer, his instincts were to put out an account of the Covid-19 origin story that was honest and not corrupted by undeclared interests and cronies within various establishments. The result was “Viral”, a book that blends both authors’ strengths as well as intelligence from open source analysts on the internet who obtained contact tracing information and archival lab research undisclosed by the Chinese government. In the detective story so pieced together, the lab leak theory is given prime suspect treatment.
At the heart of the lab leak hypothesis is Shi Zhengli who heads a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Whether there are other rooms in and around her lab doing confidential research, we may not know. Chan and Ridley deem Shi an unreliable witness – that much is apparent – otherwise they would not have gone on at length detailing Shi Zhengli and her lab’s suspicious behaviour, including obscuring Sars-related gain of function research they have been doing in the years leading up to 2019 that might shed light on how Covid-19 emerged. And including the evasions of collaborator and ally Peter Daszak the whole time – before, during or after he was tasked by the WHO to “investigate” the virology labs in Wuhan. How any number or types of dubious experiments could have given rise to (the genome of) SARS-CoV-2 is much less clear from the book, and that is arguably one of its major flaws. If there was insufficient evidence, the authors failed to Sherlock Holmes this one with any jaw-dropping deduction. It has to be said though that having an element of conspiratorial thinking is not necessarily a bad thing, unless of course too many more qualified scientists and virologists say so.
Still too unfortunately, the reliability or unreliability of one person – Shi Zhengli – is what head-scratching virologists and frankly the whole world has to go on at this point. The authors of the book are clearly not satisfied. The mounting circumstantial evidence for an accident scenario is too much for them, from the gain of function and cell-passaging experiments potentially being done in the WIV to its lax safety measures to the live bats themselves being kept there.
For the uninitiated, the key public statement put out by Shi Zhengli as part of a Scientific American interview reads:
‘ none of the sequences matched those of the viruses her team had sampled from bat caves. “That really took a load off my mind,” she says. “I had not slept a wink for days.” ’
Much hinges on the veracity of Shi's testimony. On the other hand, could WIV scientists have brought the progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 into the lab and tampered with it without even knowing they have, finding out only when it leaked?
The lab’s close geographic proximity to the location of the first superspreading event, the Huanan Seafood market, has primed it for rigorous examination by the authors, who also rightly point out that lab accidents are not at all uncommon. That is a key point that cannot be chipped away by opponents of the lab leak theory, missing other hard evidence at this point.
Reaching page 325 of this book, which could have been much longer, we are left with not an exclamation mark (!) as we see on the UK edition cover and urged on to lay blame on anyone but a big ?. If you are a seeker, read Viral.
In the early months of 2020, as the world dragged itself into a pandemic and subsequent lockdowns, the now famous biologist Alina Chan was doing some serious work. She discovered that by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, “it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV.” Moreover, it was “evolving more slowly than one newly arrived in the human species from another animal normally would”, implying that SARS-CoV-2 “was already well-adapted to human beings from the moment it was first detected in Wuhan in December 2019.” Top scientists in the field had early coalesced around the idea that SARS-CoV-2 was far more likely zoonotic than anything that leaked from a laboratory.
Virologists took note of Alina Chan’s conclusions and moved on. Non-experts by and large followed suit, but not co-author Matt Ridley. A lifelong science writer, his instincts were to put out an account of the Covid-19 origin story that was honest and not corrupted by undeclared interests and cronies within various establishments. The result was “Viral”, a book that blends both authors’ strengths as well as intelligence from open source analysts on the internet who obtained contact tracing information and archival lab research undisclosed by the Chinese government. In the detective story so pieced together, the lab leak theory is given prime suspect treatment.
At the heart of the lab leak hypothesis is Shi Zhengli who heads a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Whether there are other rooms in and around her lab doing confidential research, we may not know. Chan and Ridley deem Shi an unreliable witness – that much is apparent – otherwise they would not have gone on at length detailing Shi Zhengli and her lab’s suspicious behaviour, including obscuring Sars-related gain of function research they have been doing in the years leading up to 2019 that might shed light on how Covid-19 emerged. And including the evasions of collaborator and ally Peter Daszak the whole time – before, during or after he was tasked by the WHO to “investigate” the virology labs in Wuhan. How any number or types of dubious experiments could have given rise to (the genome of) SARS-CoV-2 is much less clear from the book, and that is arguably one of its major flaws. If there was insufficient evidence, the authors failed to Sherlock Holmes this one with any jaw-dropping deduction. It has to be said though that having an element of conspiratorial thinking is not necessarily a bad thing, unless of course too many more qualified scientists and virologists say so.
Still too unfortunately, the reliability or unreliability of one person – Shi Zhengli – is what head-scratching virologists and frankly the whole world has to go on at this point. The authors of the book are clearly not satisfied. The mounting circumstantial evidence for an accident scenario is too much for them, from the gain of function and cell-passaging experiments potentially being done in the WIV to its lax safety measures to the live bats themselves being kept there.
For the uninitiated, the key public statement put out by Shi Zhengli as part of a Scientific American interview reads:
‘ none of the sequences matched those of the viruses her team had sampled from bat caves. “That really took a load off my mind,” she says. “I had not slept a wink for days.” ’
Much hinges on the veracity of Shi's testimony. On the other hand, could WIV scientists have brought the progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 into the lab and tampered with it without even knowing they have, finding out only when it leaked?
The lab’s close geographic proximity to the location of the first superspreading event, the Huanan Seafood market, has primed it for rigorous examination by the authors, who also rightly point out that lab accidents are not at all uncommon. That is a key point that cannot be chipped away by opponents of the lab leak theory, missing other hard evidence at this point.
Reaching page 325 of this book, which could have been much longer, we are left with not an exclamation mark (!) as we see on the UK edition cover and urged on to lay blame on anyone but a big ?. If you are a seeker, read Viral.
June 5, 2024
This review went missing…it’s all here…
The Chinese lies, the furrin cleavage, the lack of a zoonotic source, the geographic isolation…all been proven true…Covid 19 came from a lab…
The Chinese lies, the furrin cleavage, the lack of a zoonotic source, the geographic isolation…all been proven true…Covid 19 came from a lab…
November 24, 2021
Soon two years into the Covid19-pandemic this is quite surely the most important book on the topic to date. Polarisation, lockdowns and political travesties notwithstanding, without coming to the root of the Origin of Covid we will remain badly equipped for the next big one.
This book is not only important to put together the puzzle around the real source of this disease that changed our lives, but it’s also extremely well-written. While a science book, it almost serves as a detective novel even, there’s plenty in it confirming that often reality is stranger than fiction.
I have followed the discourse - or rather the lack of it - since April 2020 when I for the first time started my quest to understand better how this pandemic could happen. What struck me fast was the dishonesty around it, the hush-hush, the orchestrated accusations against anyone questioning the favoured theory of the natural origin of the virus as tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists. How could that be? (Well, the answer is politics, Trump and a political left that as a consequence of anti-Trump sentiments somehow unbelievably sided with totalitarian China on this matter.)
It has been baffling to me that the most logical question around - “what role has the most advanced virology laboratory in the world studying novel
Corona viruses, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), at the absolute epicentre of this pandemic, in the context of the cause of the event that killed millions, ruined the life of hundreds of millions and that turns our world upside down” - has been sidestepped by the mainstream media, politicians and scientists alike.
In this excellent book facts are the guiding principle, just as it should be in’s cornice. The expectation is not to give the definitive answers, rather laying out the hypothesis why this is so important and why we have failed until now to come to answer.
The writing is excellent and easily digestible, likely attributable to the vast experience of Matt Ridley’s and his craftsmanship. The science is accurate, intriguing, well-presented and well-argued, likely linked to Alina Chan’s brilliant mind. I have followed Alina since the summer of 2020 and her untiring efforts to bring this discussion forward, despite the enormous countercurrent forces facing her. Brave and brilliant is my conclusion.
There are two or three chapters heavy on science, which may be trickier for the untrained reader, but despite all the virus letters and numbers it’s still easily digestible.
Another aspect of this book is the tribute to Twitter and the force it plays in our society. It’s often only discussed in the polarising terms, but this book is the living proof for Twitter’s excellent ability to bring curious minds together to achieve big goals.
To conclude: please read this book, it’s well worth it. It won’t stop here though, this matter will continue, new developments will come. Having read this you can for sure see the big picture better and be prepared for future discussions. The truth in this matter is super-important, we can’t let politics and bad intentions from superpowers and representatives of dodgy scientific organisations (yes, looking at you EcoHealth Alliance) come in its way.
Ultimately, what matters is not who is right (a remote chance for a natural origin or a likely lab leak). What matters is that we get this right. For the sake of science and for humanity.
This book is not only important to put together the puzzle around the real source of this disease that changed our lives, but it’s also extremely well-written. While a science book, it almost serves as a detective novel even, there’s plenty in it confirming that often reality is stranger than fiction.
I have followed the discourse - or rather the lack of it - since April 2020 when I for the first time started my quest to understand better how this pandemic could happen. What struck me fast was the dishonesty around it, the hush-hush, the orchestrated accusations against anyone questioning the favoured theory of the natural origin of the virus as tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists. How could that be? (Well, the answer is politics, Trump and a political left that as a consequence of anti-Trump sentiments somehow unbelievably sided with totalitarian China on this matter.)
It has been baffling to me that the most logical question around - “what role has the most advanced virology laboratory in the world studying novel
Corona viruses, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), at the absolute epicentre of this pandemic, in the context of the cause of the event that killed millions, ruined the life of hundreds of millions and that turns our world upside down” - has been sidestepped by the mainstream media, politicians and scientists alike.
In this excellent book facts are the guiding principle, just as it should be in’s cornice. The expectation is not to give the definitive answers, rather laying out the hypothesis why this is so important and why we have failed until now to come to answer.
The writing is excellent and easily digestible, likely attributable to the vast experience of Matt Ridley’s and his craftsmanship. The science is accurate, intriguing, well-presented and well-argued, likely linked to Alina Chan’s brilliant mind. I have followed Alina since the summer of 2020 and her untiring efforts to bring this discussion forward, despite the enormous countercurrent forces facing her. Brave and brilliant is my conclusion.
There are two or three chapters heavy on science, which may be trickier for the untrained reader, but despite all the virus letters and numbers it’s still easily digestible.
Another aspect of this book is the tribute to Twitter and the force it plays in our society. It’s often only discussed in the polarising terms, but this book is the living proof for Twitter’s excellent ability to bring curious minds together to achieve big goals.
To conclude: please read this book, it’s well worth it. It won’t stop here though, this matter will continue, new developments will come. Having read this you can for sure see the big picture better and be prepared for future discussions. The truth in this matter is super-important, we can’t let politics and bad intentions from superpowers and representatives of dodgy scientific organisations (yes, looking at you EcoHealth Alliance) come in its way.
Ultimately, what matters is not who is right (a remote chance for a natural origin or a likely lab leak). What matters is that we get this right. For the sake of science and for humanity.
March 8, 2024
Work is still being done in China on corona viruses from bats (they carry thousands of them). Viruses escape from labs but there is exceptional carelessness there. 129 viruses escaped from labs in the US which I found hard to believe so imagine what can happen there!!
Read this book for yourself.
I was tested for a virus that escaped from a lab in Houston. Please be aware that this happens.
Read this book for yourself.
I was tested for a virus that escaped from a lab in Houston. Please be aware that this happens.
November 26, 2021
This was an amazing book.
I really enjoyed all the research and investigations this book went into the origins of COVID-19.
Very interesting and fascinating book.
Great journalism.
4.8/5
I really enjoyed all the research and investigations this book went into the origins of COVID-19.
Very interesting and fascinating book.
Great journalism.
4.8/5
January 13, 2022
An important preface: keep in mind that I have not kept up with the latest developments between the zoonosis and lab leak hypotheses.
Dr. Chan and Viscount Ridley have provided the most up-to-date information on the major credible theories related to the origins of the COVID-19 virus.
On the zoonosis side, they examine the Wuhan wet market. They follow the frozen meat hypothesis, dubbed the Popsicle Origin. Among live animals, they look for potential pangolin origins, civet origins, and lastly, bat origins.
On the lab leak side, they followed internet sleuths who put together the missing pieces of the viruses that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was collecting--and how eight closely related viruses to COVID-19 were hidden from the world for nearly a year. Other obfuscations by Chinese scientists and the Chinese government in scientific publications, virus databases, and the mishandling of early COVID-19 cases are potentially suggestive behaviors of individuals with something to hide when transparency and cooperation should have been the number one priority.
More telling is the fact that despite over a year of tracking animals in the Wuhan wet market and across China, not a single specimen was found carrying the COVID-19 virus, or a related virus close enough to consider the zoonotic transmission. On the genetic level, COVID-19 possesses a furin cleavage site (read the book for a better explanation on what it is and why it is so significant). Of all the sarbecoviruses found and analyzed, only COVID-19 possesses this unique trait.
Though there is no definitive evidence yet on the origins of the COVID-19 virus, all hypotheses must be examined as thoroughly as possible. However, even if the lab leak theory is proven to be false, scientists must still be cautious about performing gain-of-function research on dangerous bacteria and viruses, as Chan and Ridley warns.
Dr. Chan and Viscount Ridley have provided the most up-to-date information on the major credible theories related to the origins of the COVID-19 virus.
On the zoonosis side, they examine the Wuhan wet market. They follow the frozen meat hypothesis, dubbed the Popsicle Origin. Among live animals, they look for potential pangolin origins, civet origins, and lastly, bat origins.
On the lab leak side, they followed internet sleuths who put together the missing pieces of the viruses that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was collecting--and how eight closely related viruses to COVID-19 were hidden from the world for nearly a year. Other obfuscations by Chinese scientists and the Chinese government in scientific publications, virus databases, and the mishandling of early COVID-19 cases are potentially suggestive behaviors of individuals with something to hide when transparency and cooperation should have been the number one priority.
More telling is the fact that despite over a year of tracking animals in the Wuhan wet market and across China, not a single specimen was found carrying the COVID-19 virus, or a related virus close enough to consider the zoonotic transmission. On the genetic level, COVID-19 possesses a furin cleavage site (read the book for a better explanation on what it is and why it is so significant). Of all the sarbecoviruses found and analyzed, only COVID-19 possesses this unique trait.
Though there is no definitive evidence yet on the origins of the COVID-19 virus, all hypotheses must be examined as thoroughly as possible. However, even if the lab leak theory is proven to be false, scientists must still be cautious about performing gain-of-function research on dangerous bacteria and viruses, as Chan and Ridley warns.
December 5, 2021
If this were a classic monster movie, they could add a chapter at the end where the villagers storm the Wuhan Institute of Virology with torches and pitchforks, but alas, this is the far more terrifying real world, not folklore. Despite the optimism of the authors that ‘the truth will out’, I’m pessimistic that truth will be found in this ‘post-truth’ world. I am not an expert in genetics but am a fairly well-versed information specialist, so I have some expertise with communication. William S. Burroughs proposed the ‘word as virus’, and like viruses, communication system evolution is difficult to predict. However, from the evidence available here, one can say with certainty that CCP disinformation specialists have been hard at work. I doubt they will quit anytime soon. It seems you will always be able to find someone who will argue for the ‘popsicle theory’, even if the authors here adequately debunk this ludicrous idea that frozen meat could travel thousands of miles and only infect someone at the destination (pp. 252-53) Once disinformation becomes a part of the social system it is difficult if not impossible to contain. My opinion is that eventually this lab-leak vs. natural origins debate will move from a ‘professional disagreement’ between geneticists to one between historians. The truly chilling mantra here is advice given to one of the first Chinese doctors who eventually leaked not a virus but the unauthorized information (at the time) that person-to-person transmission was a reality, and one could see this as a mantra in all totalitarian societies - “stay silent and be careful”. (p. 198) Has the CCP really escaped the premodern, ‘forbidden city’ mentality? When will the free world learn its lesson about totalitarian governments, or is the money just too good? These are questions I am left with after reading this incredible book.
May 26, 2026
Having read Breathless by David Quammen last month, and mulling over his perspective in regard to the origins of COVID-19 and his belief that the virus most likely emerged through zoonotic spillover (probably originating in bats) I became curious about the more controversial counterarguments, particularly the lab leak hypothesis.
One observation from Quammen that I found especially compelling was his suggestion that people are often predisposed toward the explanation most aligned with their professional background. Quammen’s life’s work has long centered on zoonotic diseases and viral spillover events, decades before SARS-CoV-2 emerged. By contrast, Alina Chan is a molecular biologist whose work focuses on gene therapy and cell engineering, making it understandable that she might view the possibility of laboratory involvement as more plausible.
Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19 investigates one of the biggest unresolved questions of the pandemic; where SARS-CoV-2 originated. This book takes a look at both the natural spillover theory and the possibility of an accidental laboratory leak connected to coronavirus research in Wuhan, China.
Chan and Ridley present this as one of the central anomalies surrounding SARS-CoV-2. With the 2003 SARS outbreak, scientists were able to observe an early period of rapid adaptation as the virus adjusted to human hosts through successive mutations. SARS-CoV-2, by contrast, appeared unusually well adapted to human transmission from the outset, with no clearly observed transitional phase of evolutionary fine-tuning.
That absence raises an obvious question … how did a supposedly novel zoonotic virus emerge already so efficient at infecting humans? Chan and Ridley argue that this pattern is more consistent with the possibility of a lab-associated origin, particularly in the context of gain-of-function research involving bat coronaviruses. While this is not definitive proof of a lab leak, for me, it is one of the strongest circumstantial arguments they present against a straightforward natural spillover explanation.
The most interesting chapters to me were the ones on gain-of-function and the furin cleavage site, which really piqued my interest in Breathless. I loved that Chan and Ridley delved much deeper into this topic; it truly reads like a horror story.
Even though there is a bit of repetition between Quammen’s book and Chan/Ridley’s, considering both are trying to answer how COVID-19 emerged, there are different interpretations of uncertain evidence. The two books still agree on raw facts such as SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan, bat coronavirus research occurred there, Chinese transparency was imperfect, early data were incomplete.
The disagreements or “contradictions” are largely over what probability to assign to competing explanations.
Quammen explicitly framed his book as “science in action”; a process rather than a fixed set of conclusions. He spent a lot of time with scientists themselves and emphasizes zoonotic spillover as a recurring historical pattern, while still discussing the lab-leak possibility as unresolved.
Chan and Ridley, by contrast, organize Viral around the claim that the lab-leak hypothesis deserved more serious consideration than it initially received. The structure is almost detective-like: assembling timelines, institutional decisions, research practices, and gaps in available information.
In the end, I find both theories profoundly fascinating, even if they are equally unsettling in their implications.
One observation from Quammen that I found especially compelling was his suggestion that people are often predisposed toward the explanation most aligned with their professional background. Quammen’s life’s work has long centered on zoonotic diseases and viral spillover events, decades before SARS-CoV-2 emerged. By contrast, Alina Chan is a molecular biologist whose work focuses on gene therapy and cell engineering, making it understandable that she might view the possibility of laboratory involvement as more plausible.
Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19 investigates one of the biggest unresolved questions of the pandemic; where SARS-CoV-2 originated. This book takes a look at both the natural spillover theory and the possibility of an accidental laboratory leak connected to coronavirus research in Wuhan, China.
The genomes of the 2003 [SARS] epidemic told a story of a pathogen that was new to human hosts and evolved rapidly among the earliest human cases, before settling down into a slower phase of virus evolution. In sharp contrast, no early phase of rapid evolution had been observed for SARS-CoV-2: a virus adept at infecting and transmitting between human beings had appeared out of thin air at Wuhan’s Huanan seafood market in December 2019. -page 96
Chan and Ridley present this as one of the central anomalies surrounding SARS-CoV-2. With the 2003 SARS outbreak, scientists were able to observe an early period of rapid adaptation as the virus adjusted to human hosts through successive mutations. SARS-CoV-2, by contrast, appeared unusually well adapted to human transmission from the outset, with no clearly observed transitional phase of evolutionary fine-tuning.
That absence raises an obvious question … how did a supposedly novel zoonotic virus emerge already so efficient at infecting humans? Chan and Ridley argue that this pattern is more consistent with the possibility of a lab-associated origin, particularly in the context of gain-of-function research involving bat coronaviruses. While this is not definitive proof of a lab leak, for me, it is one of the strongest circumstantial arguments they present against a straightforward natural spillover explanation.
They [Dr Baric and Dr Mark Denison of Vanderbilt University] had laid the foundations for future generations of scientists to create infectious pathogens not found in nature by weaving natural virus sequences together, even without access to samples of actual, physical virus particles. -page 185
The most interesting chapters to me were the ones on gain-of-function and the furin cleavage site, which really piqued my interest in Breathless. I loved that Chan and Ridley delved much deeper into this topic; it truly reads like a horror story.
Even though there is a bit of repetition between Quammen’s book and Chan/Ridley’s, considering both are trying to answer how COVID-19 emerged, there are different interpretations of uncertain evidence. The two books still agree on raw facts such as SARS-CoV-2 emerged in Wuhan, bat coronavirus research occurred there, Chinese transparency was imperfect, early data were incomplete.
The disagreements or “contradictions” are largely over what probability to assign to competing explanations.
Quammen explicitly framed his book as “science in action”; a process rather than a fixed set of conclusions. He spent a lot of time with scientists themselves and emphasizes zoonotic spillover as a recurring historical pattern, while still discussing the lab-leak possibility as unresolved.
Chan and Ridley, by contrast, organize Viral around the claim that the lab-leak hypothesis deserved more serious consideration than it initially received. The structure is almost detective-like: assembling timelines, institutional decisions, research practices, and gaps in available information.
In the end, I find both theories profoundly fascinating, even if they are equally unsettling in their implications.
January 25, 2022
Very interesting book. This book definitely challenged and changed some of my beliefs about the origins of Covid, whereas I went into this book mostly thinking spillover event, now I would say I’m a lot less certain in that and at the same time totally clueless about what the actual origins would be. Granted I went into reading this thinking that the “lab leak” hypothesis was mostly ranting Twitter conspiracy. So big marks for presenting the information as credible.
The book is a bit dense with genetic sequences and various spices and things that quite frankly went over my head. I mostly followed along and Ridley does a good job of explaining it, I just have no real literacy for the topic.
I do think that the book meanders at times, refusing to say anything definitive for a variety of reasons, political, scientific uncertainty, professional, reputational. This at times undermines the authors points from saying much of anything at all. It’s just a bit too nudge and a wink for me. There were parts, especially the last few chapters that get political, that seemed like a hedge. Don’t tell Michael Lewis, because he will write a middling book about it, but the narritave seemed to creep into “little guy on Twitter takes on CDC coverup” territory.
I think the take away for me is probably very similar to the US intelligence committees that, in a report from August 27, 2021, collaborated about the origins of Covid. Eight agencies participated. Four of them concluded with low certainty that COVID-19 was likely some sort of spillover event. Three had no idea and were not willing to directly speak to anyone or anything. And one agency believed a non-foul play lab leak was moderate probability. And until more information comes to light, that sort of uncertainty seems to be the most reasonable take.
The book is a bit dense with genetic sequences and various spices and things that quite frankly went over my head. I mostly followed along and Ridley does a good job of explaining it, I just have no real literacy for the topic.
I do think that the book meanders at times, refusing to say anything definitive for a variety of reasons, political, scientific uncertainty, professional, reputational. This at times undermines the authors points from saying much of anything at all. It’s just a bit too nudge and a wink for me. There were parts, especially the last few chapters that get political, that seemed like a hedge. Don’t tell Michael Lewis, because he will write a middling book about it, but the narritave seemed to creep into “little guy on Twitter takes on CDC coverup” territory.
I think the take away for me is probably very similar to the US intelligence committees that, in a report from August 27, 2021, collaborated about the origins of Covid. Eight agencies participated. Four of them concluded with low certainty that COVID-19 was likely some sort of spillover event. Three had no idea and were not willing to directly speak to anyone or anything. And one agency believed a non-foul play lab leak was moderate probability. And until more information comes to light, that sort of uncertainty seems to be the most reasonable take.
March 27, 2022
I didn't learn about this book until recently, but it was published already back in November 16, 2021. In the months since that, there has been no improvement in the evidence for natural origin. Passing time and the failure to find realistic animal origins is evidence for non-natural origin, i.e., any sort of lab leak or release model. This book is mainly about the more plausible, less sinister accidental lab leak with following cover-up by Chinese government-model. I would probably give this model 85% probability at this point.
June 4, 2022
This book is unfortunately not a crazy conspiracy theory. It is too much "inside baseball" though about both virologists and journalists. A good magazine article (e.g. from the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists) would make the same points adequately: we just don't know what turned a virus that usually causes the common cold into a global killer; we may never know because the proper investigations were not done promptly; public communication about the whole thing has been a big mess; the COVID-19 pandemic could have come from some kind of a lab leak, or not.
August 1, 2023
The only thing that can match the speed of Covid-19 vaccine development in the pharmaceuticals industry is the speed of the publishing industry in churning out books about Covid-19.
And old muggins over here is the sucker who finds them fascinating and wants to read them all.
I struggle to categorise this one, it's a sort of whodunnit detective mystery coupled with a few science lessons, an ode to Twitter, and a light exploration of the social and political forces shaping the globe.
Meanwhile the answer to where Covid-19 began, the reason I purchased and read this book in the first place is..............
We don't know.
Sorry to disappoint you.
It's fascinating reading a historical account of events that you followed closely at the time but without the power of hindsight couldn't have possibly seen past the smoke, mirrors, and misinformation.
The authors do their best to sit on the fence but definitely dangle all of their limbs on the side of lab leak. The evidence doesn't really stack up for a natural origin of Covid-19 and the Chinese have done their absolute best to block a proper investigation into the origins. The fact that not a single animal has been found with Covid-19 is worrying, as is the fact that one of the world's leading Corona virus research facilities that performs gain of function research (fiddling with viruses to make them more potent) is located right next to where the first documented Covid-19 case arose is pretty hard to ignore.
I can understand why China doesn't want the West poking around but it's pretty suspect when they start inventing other origin stories like the frozen food from Thailand, or the "lab leak" in Maryland, USA.
I really am surprised that the issue of the origins of Covid-19 aren't debated daily and with vigour. We still have no idea how the first truly global pandemic in modern history started.
The WHO is a toothless tiger but it seems to be the only one we've got. I wonder how this all would have played out if it had started in a different country. Would the USA have let external researchers in to poke around? Who would be demanding reparations etc?
Lastly, the twitter truth seekers (one aptly named The Seeker) drive a huge amount of the content and narrative of this book. They are the bold detectives rooting through the data, tirelessly searching for an answer. They're like a Scientific Arab Spring of sorts or at least that's how they're portrayed. I think one of the reinforcing lessons of this book is that the institutions we have granted mandates to protect us are at times more interested in protecting themselves (I'm sure they reason to themselves that they can't protect us if they aren't around to do it). Thankfully, there always seem to be people who want to find the truth and will do the work the world needs, often for no thanks, money, or credit. I think the book gives the twitterati too much praise but I also recognise they have an important role in applying pressure and sifting through data.
Should you read this? If you want to read one book about Covid-19 it should be Vaxxers about the development of Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. If you're into detective stories and the power of the little guy, the internet, or the little guy on the internet then this one might be for you.
And old muggins over here is the sucker who finds them fascinating and wants to read them all.
I struggle to categorise this one, it's a sort of whodunnit detective mystery coupled with a few science lessons, an ode to Twitter, and a light exploration of the social and political forces shaping the globe.
Meanwhile the answer to where Covid-19 began, the reason I purchased and read this book in the first place is..............
We don't know.
Sorry to disappoint you.
It's fascinating reading a historical account of events that you followed closely at the time but without the power of hindsight couldn't have possibly seen past the smoke, mirrors, and misinformation.
The authors do their best to sit on the fence but definitely dangle all of their limbs on the side of lab leak. The evidence doesn't really stack up for a natural origin of Covid-19 and the Chinese have done their absolute best to block a proper investigation into the origins. The fact that not a single animal has been found with Covid-19 is worrying, as is the fact that one of the world's leading Corona virus research facilities that performs gain of function research (fiddling with viruses to make them more potent) is located right next to where the first documented Covid-19 case arose is pretty hard to ignore.
I can understand why China doesn't want the West poking around but it's pretty suspect when they start inventing other origin stories like the frozen food from Thailand, or the "lab leak" in Maryland, USA.
I really am surprised that the issue of the origins of Covid-19 aren't debated daily and with vigour. We still have no idea how the first truly global pandemic in modern history started.
The WHO is a toothless tiger but it seems to be the only one we've got. I wonder how this all would have played out if it had started in a different country. Would the USA have let external researchers in to poke around? Who would be demanding reparations etc?
Lastly, the twitter truth seekers (one aptly named The Seeker) drive a huge amount of the content and narrative of this book. They are the bold detectives rooting through the data, tirelessly searching for an answer. They're like a Scientific Arab Spring of sorts or at least that's how they're portrayed. I think one of the reinforcing lessons of this book is that the institutions we have granted mandates to protect us are at times more interested in protecting themselves (I'm sure they reason to themselves that they can't protect us if they aren't around to do it). Thankfully, there always seem to be people who want to find the truth and will do the work the world needs, often for no thanks, money, or credit. I think the book gives the twitterati too much praise but I also recognise they have an important role in applying pressure and sifting through data.
Should you read this? If you want to read one book about Covid-19 it should be Vaxxers about the development of Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine. If you're into detective stories and the power of the little guy, the internet, or the little guy on the internet then this one might be for you.
November 22, 2021
Alina Chan and Matt Ridley have written an important and brave account of the events that transpired surrounding the world's search for the origins of COVID. It is an engaging read that weaves fine details and nuances, everything from sequencing data, to tweets from leaders, to codon usage. No easy feat. I think this is one of the most important books published in 2021.
March 13, 2022
This should be required reading in any information literacy course for high schoolers.
November 4, 2023
[3.5 stars]
This book gave a good overview of all the aspects considered in analyzing possible origins for COVID-19: zoonotic transmission, lab leaks, evolutionary mechanisms of mutation, and geographic sites linked to its discovery. I found the discussion of the furin cleavage site to be particularly interesting, and the train of thought that went into consideration of laboratory gain-of-function studies, along with their implications on research and safety.
Some parts were dense and confusing, and I found it hard to follow the timeline of discovery that involved cycling through multiple research papers. Some documents were missing, others weren't, and the process of putting it all together made my head hurt a little bit. Nonetheless, the work put into it was abundant and it was more magnanimous than I originally expected. In short, there were many sources of information that I had not considered before, but that provided good insight into the breadth of viral research.
I can't find the right words to describe it, but some parts about the wet markets felt opinionated rather than analytical. I noticed it more throughout the book as the topic was repeatedly mentioned from different perspectives, but it seemed that some personal bias leaked into their descriptions. I understand why analysis of the wet markets was significant to tracing viral origins, but after finishing each chapter I was left questioning some of the language that was used.
This book gave a good overview of all the aspects considered in analyzing possible origins for COVID-19: zoonotic transmission, lab leaks, evolutionary mechanisms of mutation, and geographic sites linked to its discovery. I found the discussion of the furin cleavage site to be particularly interesting, and the train of thought that went into consideration of laboratory gain-of-function studies, along with their implications on research and safety.
Some parts were dense and confusing, and I found it hard to follow the timeline of discovery that involved cycling through multiple research papers. Some documents were missing, others weren't, and the process of putting it all together made my head hurt a little bit. Nonetheless, the work put into it was abundant and it was more magnanimous than I originally expected. In short, there were many sources of information that I had not considered before, but that provided good insight into the breadth of viral research.
I can't find the right words to describe it, but some parts about the wet markets felt opinionated rather than analytical. I noticed it more throughout the book as the topic was repeatedly mentioned from different perspectives, but it seemed that some personal bias leaked into their descriptions. I understand why analysis of the wet markets was significant to tracing viral origins, but after finishing each chapter I was left questioning some of the language that was used.
November 22, 2021
The authors give a thorough and detailed analysis of the competing theories regarding the likely origins of covid-19. Although many of the facts laid out have already been reported on by various news organizations, the book gathers the facts and theories together in a clear and concise way, and gives interesting background information and a higher level of detail than is available in most news reports. It also tells the stories of the diverse group of individuals who have been instrumental in finding out more about the possible origins of the virus. (spoiler alert: though the authors give a detailed description of the main origin theories, they clearly lean towards an accidental lab leak as the most likely source of the pandemic).
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 25, 2021
I almost cannot speak. Two things I learned: 1. In the name of science is a mortal sin. 2. The “educated” are not very smart and have little common sense.
The book is well researched and written but know that it will cause an emotional response from anyone with a heart. I remain “changed” forever. The casual way that scientists discuss life helps me really see who the privileged are. Our tax dollars fund these narcissistic people. We should actually defund them all!!! Why are we spending more money chasing 🦇 💩 then we are trying to cure cancer?
Not sure I can recommend the book as it is not for the casual reader or the faint of heart. Thanks to the brave whistle blowers and the amazing data gathering detectives who are the true heros of this horrible story.
The book is well researched and written but know that it will cause an emotional response from anyone with a heart. I remain “changed” forever. The casual way that scientists discuss life helps me really see who the privileged are. Our tax dollars fund these narcissistic people. We should actually defund them all!!! Why are we spending more money chasing 🦇 💩 then we are trying to cure cancer?
Not sure I can recommend the book as it is not for the casual reader or the faint of heart. Thanks to the brave whistle blowers and the amazing data gathering detectives who are the true heros of this horrible story.
August 6, 2022
Obviously, this book isn't going to give an entirely conclusive answer as to the origin of COVID-19. It does, however, present the cases for and against natural spillover events vs. lab-leak possibilities. I will refrain from expressing my own belief about what happened so as not to ruin the book, but I think the most likely scenario of how the pandemic began will be clear to you after reading it.
Awesome read. Many times it gave me goosebumps it was so chilling. It did take me a long time to read because I really wanted to digest the information.
Awesome read. Many times it gave me goosebumps it was so chilling. It did take me a long time to read because I really wanted to digest the information.
March 17, 2023
What ever happened to free thought? Questioning things should not mean you're a conspiracy theorist! Way to go to those few who wouldn't be silenced and censored...brave! I loved the ending how they pretended to be in court trying to prove natural occurrence then lab leak with facts layed out nicely 👌
November 28, 2021
In my opinion, this book should be read by everyone affected by the COVID 19 pandemic.
And yep, that is pretty much everyone.
This is an outstanding summary of the known situation as it pertains to the potential origins of the pandemic.
I thought I had followed the story, but this book brings a welcome clarity (such as it stands as of Nov 2021), organization, and depth that has sadly been lacking.
For those looking for a definitive answer here, you will be disappointed. Despite this, I consider the book a must read. First, much material glossed over by other media is cogently (and persuasively arranged) presented in a way that is fairly stunning for those interested in what we currently know and how we know it. Second, it provides a depth of presentation and analysis that helps provide further (useful) context to the pandemic.
The authors are very careful to present the specific data points and sources, but walk the readers towards a more comprehensive understanding of our current knowledge status. A scientific background is useful, but I do not think it is required (although, I state that as someone with a science background). The authors provide complete specifics (names of viruses, sources) in a way that a) might be slightly offputting to those without a science background but that is b) very necessary given the need for specificity and precision in the development of the story. So if any reader is initially deterred, hang in there. (I found the writing engaging, readable, and clear - but I think this is a book that should be read by a wide audience of lay persons and scientists alike. Those without a science book may require slightly more patience, but I submit the authors help translate matters at every stage.
Bottom line - READ THIS BOOK!
And yep, that is pretty much everyone.
This is an outstanding summary of the known situation as it pertains to the potential origins of the pandemic.
I thought I had followed the story, but this book brings a welcome clarity (such as it stands as of Nov 2021), organization, and depth that has sadly been lacking.
For those looking for a definitive answer here, you will be disappointed. Despite this, I consider the book a must read. First, much material glossed over by other media is cogently (and persuasively arranged) presented in a way that is fairly stunning for those interested in what we currently know and how we know it. Second, it provides a depth of presentation and analysis that helps provide further (useful) context to the pandemic.
The authors are very careful to present the specific data points and sources, but walk the readers towards a more comprehensive understanding of our current knowledge status. A scientific background is useful, but I do not think it is required (although, I state that as someone with a science background). The authors provide complete specifics (names of viruses, sources) in a way that a) might be slightly offputting to those without a science background but that is b) very necessary given the need for specificity and precision in the development of the story. So if any reader is initially deterred, hang in there. (I found the writing engaging, readable, and clear - but I think this is a book that should be read by a wide audience of lay persons and scientists alike. Those without a science book may require slightly more patience, but I submit the authors help translate matters at every stage.
Bottom line - READ THIS BOOK!
May 7, 2022
Using open-source intelligence, freedom of information requests, leaked but verified communications, 5th Viscount Ridley and Dr Alicia Chan join forces to highlight what the China-WHO report has admitted: namely “no firm conclusion therefore about the role of the Huanan market in the origin of the outbreak, or how the infection was introduced into the market, can currently be drawn” (p.88) and “the virus was well adapted to human transmission from the moment it was first detected” (p.98). Experts agree that “additional genomic sequence data from geographically – and temporally – diverse viral samples are needed to determine the origin and evolution of the virus” (p.154). Copious amount of scientific background information and historical precedents are presented. Naturally a great portion of the book is devoted to the nature and conduct of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, particularly its work on SARS related viruses in bats. Also discussed are gain-of-function experiments, pioneered by an US/Japan and a Dutch group, and endorsed by Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci of the NIH. These were subsequently replicated by other groups. Alas, dogs that didn't bark are no substitute to smoking guns. As the authors put it, “You may not like the lack of transparency, and we don't, but it is hardly proof of guilt” (p.275). Whilst the intricacy of Bayesian Probability is beyond the scope of the book, without a full command of this it is doubtful whether any meaningful discussions as desired by the authors can be conducted – individual readers can decide if this is the case. Three (or maybe four) stars.
Read
February 8, 2022As of this writing in February 2022, we are more than 2 years out from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the origins of the outbreak remain a mystery. Whether the virus spread to humans naturally via wildlife handled in Wuhan, or it spread via an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the available evidence remains inconclusive.
My feelings on this book remain similarly inconclusive.
The authors of Viral believe that the most likely cause of the COVID-19 pandemic was an accidental laboratory leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in late 2019. They painstakingly pursue the available evidence to support the lab leak hypothesis, while also making (in my estimation) a decent examination of the evidence for a zoonotic origin. To me, this book reads as very thoroughly researched and it manages to steer clear of zany conspiracy theories.
However, I'm no scientist, so I don't fully trust my judgment of this book. I'd love to read more educated responses from scientists. My background is in science journalism and I worked for years reporting on foodborne illness outbreaks as part of my job, but I only know enough to know that there's a lot I don't know about how pandemics occur and spread. And I know much less about the benefits and risks of virology research. (It seems to me that both the benefits and risks could be described as "immense".)
The main source of my apprehension toward this book is the background of one of the co-authors, Matt Ridley. It's worth noting that on top of being a science writer, Ridley is a conservative, pro-Brexit politician in the United Kingdom. He's also known as a climate change "lukewarmer": He concedes that man-made climate change is happening, but he doesn't think it's necessarily a big deal. None of this means that Ridley's arguments regarding COVID-19 should be immediately dismissed, but his background does cause me to read this book with heightened caution and skepticism. Alina Chan is a molecular biology postdoc at the Harvard/MIT Broad Institute, and from the little I know of her background, it doesn't give me pause the way Ridley's does.
All that said, my layman interpretation is that this book makes a great case for treating the lab leak origin as a theory worthy of investigation.
On the one hand, history certainly favors zoonosis as the likeliest origin. To date, all viral pandemics have had a natural origin. A pandemic-causing virus originating from a lab would be totally unprecedented. And if it did occur naturally, Wuhan's wildlife markets are a perfectly plausible place for an outbreak to originate.
On the other hand, lab leaks of infectious pathogens have occurred, even though nothing has reached pandemic scale before. For example, a SARS-CoV outbreak in Singapore in 2003 was traced back to a laboratory worker who was infected after "inappropriate laboratory standards and a cross-contamination of West Nile virus samples with SARS coronavirus in the laboratory led to the infection of the doctoral student." An outbreak of smallpox occurred in London in 1972 when a lab worker handling live virus became infected and spread the virus to 3 other people, 2 of whom died.
According to this book's authors, the closest known relative of COVID-19 is RaTG13, a SARS-like coronavirus found in samples of bat feces from a defunct mine in China's Yunnan province in 2013. Samples of RaTG13 were held in the WIV, and scientists from the WIV collected 293 distinct coronaviruses from that mine alone. They were initially drawn to studying viruses from the mine's bats after a group of 6 miners fell ill from an unknown disease after cleaning the mine, and 3 died from pneumonia. However, none of those miners tested positive for a coronavirus. And by genetics standards, a 96.1% genetic match between RaTG13 and COVID-19 is light years away from being a smoking gun.
For the first year of the pandemic, the overwhelming narrative from mainstream scientists, government officials, and the media was that this virus very likely came from a wild animal. Meanwhile, the loudest voices pushing the lab leak theory were the same ones making dubious claims about the virus itself -- as well as election fraud, climate change, face masks, vaccines, and so on. The reasonable voices in the public sphere seemed to favor zoonosis by a long shot.
It wasn't until more than a year into the pandemic that the tide began to shift toward taking the lab leak theory seriously. Facebook changed its policy of initially censoring posts about the lab leak as "misinformation." Many major news outlets retracted previous fact checks that described the lab leak theory as "debunked" or "a conspiracy." Dr. Anthony Fauci has said that he believes zoonosis remains the most likely cause, but thinks that the possibility of a lab leak deserves more investigation. By July 2021, a consortium of U.S. intelligence agencies estimated that the lab leak theory "is at least as credible as the possibility that it emerged naturally in the wild."
The authors of Viral claim that when the pandemic began, they also believed that zoonosis was the likeliest origin. Only as time went on did they begin to wonder about the possibility of lab leak. They ask an important question: "Why Wuhan?" Why did the outbreak occur in Wuhan, with a virus more closely associated with Yunnan province, more than 1,000 miles away? Wuhan is a metropolis of 11 million people, so it is certainly plausible for an outbreak to naturally arise there, but it's also coincidentally the home of one of the world's top coronavirus research institutes.
To quote the journalist Rowan Jacobsen, "Despite 15 years of coronavirus hunting and testing by the WIV, it was helpless to prevent a pandemic in its own backyard. If that's a coincidence, it's one of the great ironies of history."
Again, there are reasonable theories to explain this irony. But we still don't have proof in either direction, and the likelihood of finding the answer only dwindles as time goes on. Knowing how this pandemic happened is a critical step in preventing the next one. Personally, I'd like to keep the once-in-a-lifetime pandemics to just one in my lifetime.
My feelings on this book remain similarly inconclusive.
The authors of Viral believe that the most likely cause of the COVID-19 pandemic was an accidental laboratory leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in late 2019. They painstakingly pursue the available evidence to support the lab leak hypothesis, while also making (in my estimation) a decent examination of the evidence for a zoonotic origin. To me, this book reads as very thoroughly researched and it manages to steer clear of zany conspiracy theories.
However, I'm no scientist, so I don't fully trust my judgment of this book. I'd love to read more educated responses from scientists. My background is in science journalism and I worked for years reporting on foodborne illness outbreaks as part of my job, but I only know enough to know that there's a lot I don't know about how pandemics occur and spread. And I know much less about the benefits and risks of virology research. (It seems to me that both the benefits and risks could be described as "immense".)
The main source of my apprehension toward this book is the background of one of the co-authors, Matt Ridley. It's worth noting that on top of being a science writer, Ridley is a conservative, pro-Brexit politician in the United Kingdom. He's also known as a climate change "lukewarmer": He concedes that man-made climate change is happening, but he doesn't think it's necessarily a big deal. None of this means that Ridley's arguments regarding COVID-19 should be immediately dismissed, but his background does cause me to read this book with heightened caution and skepticism. Alina Chan is a molecular biology postdoc at the Harvard/MIT Broad Institute, and from the little I know of her background, it doesn't give me pause the way Ridley's does.
All that said, my layman interpretation is that this book makes a great case for treating the lab leak origin as a theory worthy of investigation.
On the one hand, history certainly favors zoonosis as the likeliest origin. To date, all viral pandemics have had a natural origin. A pandemic-causing virus originating from a lab would be totally unprecedented. And if it did occur naturally, Wuhan's wildlife markets are a perfectly plausible place for an outbreak to originate.
On the other hand, lab leaks of infectious pathogens have occurred, even though nothing has reached pandemic scale before. For example, a SARS-CoV outbreak in Singapore in 2003 was traced back to a laboratory worker who was infected after "inappropriate laboratory standards and a cross-contamination of West Nile virus samples with SARS coronavirus in the laboratory led to the infection of the doctoral student." An outbreak of smallpox occurred in London in 1972 when a lab worker handling live virus became infected and spread the virus to 3 other people, 2 of whom died.
According to this book's authors, the closest known relative of COVID-19 is RaTG13, a SARS-like coronavirus found in samples of bat feces from a defunct mine in China's Yunnan province in 2013. Samples of RaTG13 were held in the WIV, and scientists from the WIV collected 293 distinct coronaviruses from that mine alone. They were initially drawn to studying viruses from the mine's bats after a group of 6 miners fell ill from an unknown disease after cleaning the mine, and 3 died from pneumonia. However, none of those miners tested positive for a coronavirus. And by genetics standards, a 96.1% genetic match between RaTG13 and COVID-19 is light years away from being a smoking gun.
For the first year of the pandemic, the overwhelming narrative from mainstream scientists, government officials, and the media was that this virus very likely came from a wild animal. Meanwhile, the loudest voices pushing the lab leak theory were the same ones making dubious claims about the virus itself -- as well as election fraud, climate change, face masks, vaccines, and so on. The reasonable voices in the public sphere seemed to favor zoonosis by a long shot.
It wasn't until more than a year into the pandemic that the tide began to shift toward taking the lab leak theory seriously. Facebook changed its policy of initially censoring posts about the lab leak as "misinformation." Many major news outlets retracted previous fact checks that described the lab leak theory as "debunked" or "a conspiracy." Dr. Anthony Fauci has said that he believes zoonosis remains the most likely cause, but thinks that the possibility of a lab leak deserves more investigation. By July 2021, a consortium of U.S. intelligence agencies estimated that the lab leak theory "is at least as credible as the possibility that it emerged naturally in the wild."
The authors of Viral claim that when the pandemic began, they also believed that zoonosis was the likeliest origin. Only as time went on did they begin to wonder about the possibility of lab leak. They ask an important question: "Why Wuhan?" Why did the outbreak occur in Wuhan, with a virus more closely associated with Yunnan province, more than 1,000 miles away? Wuhan is a metropolis of 11 million people, so it is certainly plausible for an outbreak to naturally arise there, but it's also coincidentally the home of one of the world's top coronavirus research institutes.
To quote the journalist Rowan Jacobsen, "Despite 15 years of coronavirus hunting and testing by the WIV, it was helpless to prevent a pandemic in its own backyard. If that's a coincidence, it's one of the great ironies of history."
Again, there are reasonable theories to explain this irony. But we still don't have proof in either direction, and the likelihood of finding the answer only dwindles as time goes on. Knowing how this pandemic happened is a critical step in preventing the next one. Personally, I'd like to keep the once-in-a-lifetime pandemics to just one in my lifetime.
December 10, 2021
Whew! If there is any book which you should read re Covid 19 this is it. Both authors write with unceasingly explicit writing that is very common sensical and adroit. Burden Tennis...This is the best new word that amplifies and shows where we are at and how to has hampered and helped to find out what has happened and why. Science. Biologically engineered viruses.....Naturally occurring deadly viruses....Animals-humans-plants- medicines-secret workings on cells-Its all there. Read this if you dare.
November 25, 2021
Read It
An actual scientific evaluation of possible factors that are responsible for the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Required reading for those who wish to go beyond news reports and understand the underlying issues.
An actual scientific evaluation of possible factors that are responsible for the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Required reading for those who wish to go beyond news reports and understand the underlying issues.
December 22, 2021
Book of the year! Yet another amazing book by Matt Ridley.
February 21, 2022
Excellent reporting on a timely subject. The lower review is due to prior editing and difficult to follow writing style, however, this is well worth the read to discover about Covid 19 origin.
January 10, 2023
The underlying principle of science is the free flow of information without centralized authorities decreeing what the truth is. The argument of a so called scientific consensus that is touted around these days on whatever topic is an attempt to control and direct this flow of information. Whatever the motivation, the world will drift further from the truth.
This all relates to leftist media touting everything other than official Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) propaganda of the virus origins as conspiracy theories and, of course, using the “scientific consensus” line. Similarities with another hot global topic? Anyway, as more facts emerged that couldn’t be ignored, New York Times, Vox, Washington Post, Politifact among others would subtly alter their articles about COVID-19 origin to gradually distance themselves from the CCP’s storyline. Not to mention the WHO delaying the declaring an international emergency until 30 of January 2020 and a global pandemic until 11 of March 2020 on the back of Chinese lobbying.
So far the story is as follows. Chinese scientists in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) were studying sarbecoviruses very similar to SARS-COV-2 from as early as 2012, when 6 men from a mine in Mojang were hospitalized with a suspected bat virus. 8 sarbecoviruses are found from the Mojang mine by the WIV in 2015. The leading scientist of the WIV, dr Shi, publishes a paper in 2015 manipulating the furin cleavage site of MERS and MERS-like spike genes and co-authors a paper on creating a chimeric sarbecovirus with a spike gene from a bat virus.
This same S1/S2 furin cleavage site in the spike gene of SARS-CoV-2 will be the unique part of the virus that will be crucial in making it more infectious. Bear in mind that no other sarbecovirus has one, including all of SARS-CoV-2’s closest relatives and the dozens of other SARS-like viruses collected from bats. Furthermore, dr Shi of WIV in his early papers describing the novel SARS-COV-2 virus manages to completely ignore the furin cleavage site as if it didn’t exist while being the most unique part of the virus. It’s as if someone found a unicorn and dr Shi describing the properties of the animal accurately and in detail like a regular horse and failing to mention that it has horn on its head.
Moving on, in 2017 dr Shi reports the creation of 8 recombinant bat sarbecoviruses and in 2018 the full genome of RaTG12 is published, which will be the closest known relative to the SARS-COV-2 virus along with the other 8 viruses studied in the WIV. In September of 2019 the extensive pathogen database of WIV will be taken offline with dubious excuses of dangers of hacking. Later in the same year, Dr Peter Daszak, a close collaborator with WIV and dr Shi, describes progress with finding 100 novel sarbecoviruses; some that can infect human cells and humanised mice in the laboratory. Covid-19/SARS-CoV-2 is first detected in Wuhan in late 2019.
So essentially the closest known relatives of SARS-COV-2 were studies for years before the pandemic and gain-of-function experiments were performed on them, specifically with the furin cleavage site of the spike gene of the virus. This same site had successfully been manipulated in the past to enhance the virulence of MERS-like viruses. As for the Mojang mine, it was closed off and heavily guarded to this day by the Chinese government, with no possible access by any journalist or anyone else for that matter. The Wuhan wet animal market was swabbed for viruses and no source for the SARS-COV-2 was found. No other source for the SARS-COV-2 infection has been found in nature.
The gain-of-function research in the WIV with SARS-like viruses that had pandemic potential has been confirmed by several leaks in the recent years. Keep in mind that all the information contrary to Chinese propaganda came largely from independent researchers who tirelessly combed through endless databases and documents to arrive at the truth. While the information we have now is not conclusive evidence and still a proper investigation is required, it still points very clearly to lab origins of the virus and the burden of evidence is on the other side, trying to prove natural origins of the virus.
In the end, we must remember that true science is the free flow of information, the ability of an individual to have enough imagination to doubt the official narratives that are backed by nothing other than “because we say so”.
This all relates to leftist media touting everything other than official Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) propaganda of the virus origins as conspiracy theories and, of course, using the “scientific consensus” line. Similarities with another hot global topic? Anyway, as more facts emerged that couldn’t be ignored, New York Times, Vox, Washington Post, Politifact among others would subtly alter their articles about COVID-19 origin to gradually distance themselves from the CCP’s storyline. Not to mention the WHO delaying the declaring an international emergency until 30 of January 2020 and a global pandemic until 11 of March 2020 on the back of Chinese lobbying.
So far the story is as follows. Chinese scientists in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) were studying sarbecoviruses very similar to SARS-COV-2 from as early as 2012, when 6 men from a mine in Mojang were hospitalized with a suspected bat virus. 8 sarbecoviruses are found from the Mojang mine by the WIV in 2015. The leading scientist of the WIV, dr Shi, publishes a paper in 2015 manipulating the furin cleavage site of MERS and MERS-like spike genes and co-authors a paper on creating a chimeric sarbecovirus with a spike gene from a bat virus.
This same S1/S2 furin cleavage site in the spike gene of SARS-CoV-2 will be the unique part of the virus that will be crucial in making it more infectious. Bear in mind that no other sarbecovirus has one, including all of SARS-CoV-2’s closest relatives and the dozens of other SARS-like viruses collected from bats. Furthermore, dr Shi of WIV in his early papers describing the novel SARS-COV-2 virus manages to completely ignore the furin cleavage site as if it didn’t exist while being the most unique part of the virus. It’s as if someone found a unicorn and dr Shi describing the properties of the animal accurately and in detail like a regular horse and failing to mention that it has horn on its head.
Moving on, in 2017 dr Shi reports the creation of 8 recombinant bat sarbecoviruses and in 2018 the full genome of RaTG12 is published, which will be the closest known relative to the SARS-COV-2 virus along with the other 8 viruses studied in the WIV. In September of 2019 the extensive pathogen database of WIV will be taken offline with dubious excuses of dangers of hacking. Later in the same year, Dr Peter Daszak, a close collaborator with WIV and dr Shi, describes progress with finding 100 novel sarbecoviruses; some that can infect human cells and humanised mice in the laboratory. Covid-19/SARS-CoV-2 is first detected in Wuhan in late 2019.
So essentially the closest known relatives of SARS-COV-2 were studies for years before the pandemic and gain-of-function experiments were performed on them, specifically with the furin cleavage site of the spike gene of the virus. This same site had successfully been manipulated in the past to enhance the virulence of MERS-like viruses. As for the Mojang mine, it was closed off and heavily guarded to this day by the Chinese government, with no possible access by any journalist or anyone else for that matter. The Wuhan wet animal market was swabbed for viruses and no source for the SARS-COV-2 was found. No other source for the SARS-COV-2 infection has been found in nature.
The gain-of-function research in the WIV with SARS-like viruses that had pandemic potential has been confirmed by several leaks in the recent years. Keep in mind that all the information contrary to Chinese propaganda came largely from independent researchers who tirelessly combed through endless databases and documents to arrive at the truth. While the information we have now is not conclusive evidence and still a proper investigation is required, it still points very clearly to lab origins of the virus and the burden of evidence is on the other side, trying to prove natural origins of the virus.
In the end, we must remember that true science is the free flow of information, the ability of an individual to have enough imagination to doubt the official narratives that are backed by nothing other than “because we say so”.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 209 reviews