Did the corona virus come from a Chinese lab after all? After that theory was long seriously questioned by experts, the FBI and the US Department of Energy are causing a stir by stating that it is ‘probable’. But virologist Marion Koopmans, who conducted research in China on behalf of the World Health Organization, cannot do anything with that. “It has become a political game.”
The US Department of Energy reports in a leaked report that it is quite possible that a leak from a Chinese laboratory is responsible for the corona epidemic. It would be the Wuhan Institute of Virology. And the director of the FBI echoed that opinion on Tuesday.
Admittedly, the ministry added that it posited it with ‘little confidence’, but still. In recent days, it was enough for the Republicans to claim that former President Donald Trump was right, who has often expressed the theory.
So far, the dominant view has been that the virus discovered in late 2019 came from wild animals in a market in Wuhan and thus jumped from animals to humans. An international research team from the World Health Organization concluded this in July last year. The theory that the virus came from a Chinese lab has been called “extremely unlikely.”
The Hague does not want to burn its fingers on it
What does the Netherlands think of the American statements? The Hague does not want to burn its fingers on it. The ministries of Foreign Affairs and Health have nothing to report on the matter, they say. Public Health refers for comment to virologist Marion Koopmans, who conducted research on behalf of the WHO.
The much-discussed virologist can therefore take the chestnuts out of the fire. Koopmans does not hide and calls the American statements ‘pointless’ in a conversation with De Telegraaf. “It is difficult to verify, because no evidence is provided. Scientifically, you simply cannot weigh it.”
She is disappointed by the statements, because she would have liked to have done more research in China. “It has become a political game, in which the West points increasingly fiercely at China and vice versa. As a result, all research has come to a standstill. That’s why I don’t understand why the FBI is now coming up with this statement again. That’s just a shame. Because even though I think it’s very unlikely, we can’t rule out the lab theory 100 percent yet.”
Animal market
She points to the existing evidence in the WHO study and other studies in Wuhan. For example, the first people who were found to have the virus worked at the animal market. The first more than 100 corona patients almost all lived around the market, while patients who lived further away had ties to the market.
In addition, the researchers found virus particles on a cage, two carts, a water drain and on a ‘feather removal device’. According to Koopmans, it is therefore most likely that the virus entered the market via wild animals and was then transferred to humans. “In addition, the most likely scenario is that it originally came from a bat, perhaps with an intermediate step via one of the wild animals traded on the market. Moreover, it has happened often enough in the past that animals have caused major outbreaks.”
However, the WHO study has been criticized for missing lab journals, technical data and raw files. “Of course there is always more to discover and better research can always be done,” admits Koopmans. “But China has indeed shared a lot. The problem is that there was already a lot of criticism against the country, arguing that too little was shared before we even delivered the report.”
‘slander’
China calls the statement that the virus comes from its laboratory slander. In the meantime, stories have been launched in the country that the virus does not come from Wuhan, but from a US military laboratory in Frederick, Maryland. The US ambassador in Beijing, meanwhile, has again urged the Chinese government to be more open about the origin of the virus.
For virologist Ab Osterhaus, this shows that the entire discussion has been politicized. “You now also see in America that the Republicans and Democrats are divided on the subject. While in reality you should leave this to science. You have to look at it independently, apart from political considerations. But that just doesn’t seem possible.”
He also thinks that as long as no additional data is shown by the FBI, the lab theory remains unlikely. “It’s like a plane crashing. It can happen, but then a lot of things have to go wrong. Such a thing is difficult to prove, because even if a virus was found in the lab, it could have been brought from the outside. It remains more likely to me that the virus was circulating outside.”