Initially dismissed as a conspiracy theory, the idea that Covid-19 may have originated from a laboratory in China has gradually gained traction. This theory clashed with the zoonotic hypothesis, which posits the virus jumped from animals to humans, and became a point of contention not only within scientific circles but also among intelligence agencies and political leaders.  

 

In 2021, amid growing frustration over China’s lack of transparency, President Biden tasked U.S. intelligence agencies with investigating the origins of the virus. The intelligence community was split. Most agencies leaned toward the zoonotic explanation with “low confidence,” while the FBI stood apart, asserting with “moderate confidence” that a lab leak was more likely. Yet, despite its distinct conclusion, the FBI was notably absent from the briefing given to Biden and his senior advisors in August 2021.  

 

Jason Bannan, a senior FBI scientist involved in the investigation, found this omission surprising. “Being the only agency that assessed a laboratory origin as more likely, we anticipated the FBI would be asked to attend,” Bannan said. However, a spokesperson for the Director of National Intelligence argued that divergent views were adequately represented during the briefing, even if individual agencies were not present.  

 

Behind the scenes, the disagreements ran deeper than many realized. At the National Center for Medical Intelligence, three scientists—John Hardham, Robert Cutlip, and Jean-Paul Chretien—concluded that Covid-19 was likely engineered in a lab through “gain of function” research. Their findings clashed with the position of their parent agency, the Defense Intelligence Agency, and were excluded from the final report to the president.

 

In a twist, the scientists were later instructed to cease sharing their work with the FBI, which some within their ranks claimed was acting “off the reservation.” Meanwhile, their findings were leaked years later, fueling debates during congressional hearings.  

 

The broader investigation, dubbed the “90-day sprint,” was riddled with controversy. Intelligence experts clashed over the interpretation of data, including a comparison of Covid-19 to past zoonotic outbreaks like Ebola and MERS. FBI scientists argued these comparisons were misleading due to the unique contagiousness of coronaviruses, while others insisted the data underscored the plausibility of zoonotic transmission.  

 

Geography also fueled the debate. Some argued that Covid-19’s origin in Wuhan, far from the bat populations in Yunnan province where similar coronaviruses were previously detected, weakened the zoonotic theory. Critics countered that China’s lack of an effective surveillance network in rural areas left such gaps inconclusive.  

 

Despite these conflicts, proponents of both theories remained firm. Ralph Baric, a prominent coronavirus researcher, testified before Congress that the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s safety protocols were inadequate for the high-risk research being conducted there. Yet, others, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, maintained that the virus most likely had natural origins.  

 

By mid-2023, the U.S. Energy Department joined the FBI in supporting the lab-leak theory, though both conclusions were drawn with limited confidence. Newly declassified intelligence confirmed that the Wuhan lab had experimented with genetic engineering on coronaviruses, but no direct link to Covid-19 was established.  

 

Now retired, Bannan is among those advocating for a renewed examination of the evidence. “What ended up on the intelligence community’s cutting-room floor needs to be re-examined,” he stated, emphasizing the need for continued scrutiny despite diminished investigative momentum.  

 

The quest to uncover the truth about Covid-19’s origins remains unresolved. More than five years since the outbreak, the debate continues, highlighting not only scientific and geopolitical tensions but also the challenges of seeking answers in the absence of cooperation.  

 

Based on a report by the WSJ 2024-12-28

 

 

 

May have ... 

 

I can't believe anyone still thinks it was not a weaponized virus that accidentally or not, that got released from a lab.

5 hours ago, KhunLA said:

May have ... 

 

I can't believe anyone still thinks it was not a weaponized virus that accidentally or not, that got released from a lab.

 

It's hard to imagine a disaster other than the origin of the coronovirus that the Chinese or USA governments would be more motivated to cover up at all costs.  As some have pointed out, if the origin is from a Chinese lab and if the US were directly involved, such as providing virus samples, Chinese cooperation is likely not needed to reach a conclusion.  

 

Fun fact that you won't find on Fauci's wikipedia page other than a vague one sentence mention - that he was hand picked by Dick Cheney and given complete control over US biodefense research. 

 

"...In other words, as far as NIAID was concerned, there was no meaningful administrative distinction between biodefence and scientific research. With the stroke of Cheney’s pen, all United States biodefence efforts, classified or unclassified, were placed under the aegis of Anthony Fauci. So important was this new command structure that a representative from the office of Scooter Libby, Cheney’s powerful chief of staff, was physically placed in NIAID headquarters in Washington during the transition to function as “a kind of political commissar” from the vice president’s office. This gave Fauci unparalleled access to not just Cheney, but President Bush, to whom he had an open channel.

 

Fauci now had a virtual carte blanche to not merely approve but design and run the kind of research projects he sought — and could do so with no oversight structure above him. Biodefence projects that formerly would have fallen under the authority of military or intelligence agencies were now under his direct supervision."

 

[Note Ebright mentioned below is convinced covid resulted from a lab leak - maybe his 2003 concerns were prescient or is fitting facts to support his position?] 

"...but it was Fauci’s ability to span the divide between science and politics, to “play ball”, that made him essential to the political echelon. The rapid increase in biodefence funding in the post-9/11 world, and the mushrooming of agencies and departments involved in the endeavour, would inevitably draw critics. One was, and still is, Richard Ebright, a major figure in the world of epidemiology who serves as chair of the Board of Governors and is a Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University.

 

“...This well-intentioned response may perversely have exactly the opposite effect,” Ebright told the Los Angeles Times in 2003, implying that the burgeoning field of biodefence research could lead to leaks, failures, and even a bioweapons arms race. But, by then, the Bush administration had hired a man credible enough to respond to, and, in many ways, outshine the critics. “It’s going to be a challenge,” Fauci told the Times, dismissing Ebright’s concern as “spurious”. “But I have every confidence that the biomedical research community will adapt well to the change.”

 

"Spurious?"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laboratory_biosecurity_incidents

 

 

 

24 minutes ago, Oliver Holzerfilled said:

Chinese or USA governments would be more motivated to cover up at all costs

 

Cover-ups in open, democratic societies simply don't work. In the event of an incident, the simple implementation of follow-up, corrective and prevention measures, involving tents of people, playing different roles within an organization, is almost impossible to hide and a clear sign that something went wrong.

 

Cover-ups only work under totalitarian regimes, or in the sick minds of conspiracy theorists and in Hollywood movies, which spare no effort to undermine Americans' trust in national institutions.

 

Those who don't understand this do not understand the true nature of open, democratic societies, vs totalitarian ones. And very likely don't deserve to live as free men and women in an open society. 

 

Agree with @AndreasHG

They are nearly impossible to cover up indefinitely.  But in some cases it can take awhile to reveal them.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study

 

From the beginning both theories were seen as possible. The premises of the article is wrong, making the whole article irrelevant.

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

From the beginning both theories were seen as possible. The premises of the article is wrong, making the whole article irrelevant.

So this is wrong? Pretty sure its 100% accurate

8 hours ago, Social Media said:

Initially dismissed as a conspiracy theory, the idea that Covid-19 may have originated from a laboratory in China has gradually gained traction.

 

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

From the beginning both theories were seen as possible. The premises of the article is wrong, making the whole article irrelevant.

But those who supported the lab leak theory, including the FBI as the article point out, were ignored, censored by the media and finally suppressed from any debate on the issue. The only acceptable narrative was the one put forward by Fauci and the US government.

 

That is the premise of the article, so why exactly is is it irrelevant?

Anyone who bothers to do a little research can, at this point, find the "truth."  

 

One of the reasons I left the USA. 

 

I guess that's all I can say.  

7 hours ago, KhunLA said:

May have ... 

 

I can't believe anyone still thinks it was not a weaponized virus that accidentally or not, that got released from a lab.

Expect real transparency or the best

it will ever get, when Trumps wingpeople get in!

23 minutes ago, riclag said:

Expect real transparency or the best

it will ever get, when Trumps wingpeople get in!

Already transparent enough, as they tore fauci apart in Senate hearings on it.  If not for the corrupt DOJ they would have charged him for lying to Congress.

1 hour ago, roquefort said:

That is the premise of the article, so why exactly is is it irrelevant?

 

Because it doesn't fits with his woke mind.

49 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Already transparent enough, as they tore fauci apart in Senate hearings on it.  If not for the corrupt DOJ they would have charged him for lying to Congress.

The same people who gave the two lovers Stroz & Page a settlement.

The same doj that reinstated Andy McCabe his retirement back

 

https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/28/politics/peter-strzok-lisa-page-fbi-settlement-doj/index.html

I do believe the US knows the exact origin of kung flu but for some strange reason is protecting China.  Perhaps if they

released the truth, the entire world would revolt against China in every way imaginable. 

2 hours ago, roquefort said:

But those who supported the lab leak theory, including the FBI as the article point out, were ignored, censored by the media and finally suppressed from any debate on the issue. The only acceptable narrative was the one put forward by Fauci and the US government.

 

That is the premise of the article, so why exactly is is it irrelevant?

It was just a lame attempt to blame the messenger WSJ.

 

The same theme was published by Forbes back in Feb

 

Timeline: How The Covid Lab Leak Origin Story Went From 'Conspiracy Theory' To Government Debate

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2023/02/26/timeline-how-the-covid-lab-leak-origin-story-went-from-conspiracy-theory-to-government-debate/

 

EDIT: Oh look below, another one blaming the messenger.........lol

The rewritten report above by the Rupert Murdoch-owned Wall Street Journal says the COVID lab leak theory "has gradually gained traction." I don't see anything in the OP re-write that actually supports that premise.

 

What the OP report above fails to say is that U.S. government intelligence and scientific agencies have been divided on the COVID origin issue for a long time, with more of them favoring the species jump theory and a minority of them, the FBI and DOE, favoring the lab leak theory. AFAIK, nothing much has changed in that regard.

 

And the Republicans in the U.S. House of Reps. spent more than a year supposedly trying to produce some clear evidence or proof that a lab leak was the origin of COVID, and in the end, they came up with nothing that established that premise or even moved the needle in any way.

 

As the New York Times reported last May:

 

"But in a report and in extensive questioning on Wednesday, the Republicans offered no new information suggesting that EcoHealth Alliance or Dr. Daszak were involved in the coronavirus outbreak. And they did not produce any evidence pointing directly to a coronavirus leak from a lab in China, with or without EcoHealth’s involvement, a hitch in their yearslong effort to implicate Chinese and American scientists in the beginnings of the pandemic. [emphasis added]

...

The subcommittee, which is led by Republicans, has reviewed nearly a half-million pages of documents and conducted over 100 hours of private interviews in the course of investigating the origin of Covid, Representative Raul Ruiz of California, the panel’s top Democrat, said on Wednesday.

 

But, Mr. Ruiz said, the subcommittee has found “no evidence” linking the pandemic to EcoHealth’s research. And he added that the investigation had not “meaningfully advanced our understanding of the pandemic’s origins.” Rather, he said, the subcommittee’s work now “appeared to be an effort to weaponize concerns about a lab-related origin to fuel sentiment against our nation’s scientists and public health officials for partisan gain.”

 

https://archive.ph/Ho5gO

 

And as further reported by the Associated Press in June 2023:

 

"There was newfound interest from researchers following the revelation earlier this year that the Department of Energy’s intelligence arm had issued a report arguing for a lab-related incident.

 

But Friday’s report said the intelligence community has not gone further. Four agencies still believe the virus was transferred from animals to humans, and two agencies — the Energy Department and the FBI — believe the virus leaked from a lab. The CIA and another agency have not made an assessment." [emphasis added]

 

The [Wuhan] lab genetically engineered viruses as part of its research, the report said, including efforts to combine different viruses. But the report says U.S. intelligence “has no information, however, indicating that any WIV genetic engineering work has involved SARS-CoV-2, a close progenitor, or a backbone virus that is closely-related enough to have been the source of the pandemic.” [emphasis added]

 

https://apnews.com/article/covid19-united-states-intelligence-china-23dcbde0be5638556739b564ece97027

 

 

This is one of the more recent scientific reports I've seen on the COVID origins issue, published in the journal Cell in September 2024 by an international team of researchers:

 

Genetic tracing of market wildlife and viruses at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic

...

Discussion

"Extensive epidemiological evidence supports wildlife trade at the Huanan market as the most likely conduit for the COVID-19 pandemic’s origin.^3,76 Herein, we both describe metagenomic evidence for identification of the plausible intermediate host species at the market, and analyze metagenomic and phylogenetic evidence that further supports the hypothesis of zoonotic emergence at this location.

...

Retrospective studies should be performed, where possible, testing the species described here throughout the animal supply chains of Southeast Asia and southern China, through which in all scientific likelihood the COVID-19 pandemic emerged."

 

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(24)00901-2

 

And as reported in more layman's terms by the BBC:

Genetic ghosts suggest Covid’s market origins

19 September 2024

 

"A team of scientists say it is “beyond reasonable doubt” the Covid pandemic started with infected animals sold at a market, rather than a laboratory leak. They were analysing hundreds of samples collected from Wuhan, China, in January 2020.

 

The results identify a shortlist of animals – including racoon dogs, civets and bamboo rats – as potential sources of the pandemic.

 

Despite even highlighting one market stall as a hotspot of both animals and coronavirus, the study cannot provide definitive proof."

 

(more)

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8095xjg4po

 

The media of course is responsible for many of the arguments. Those that continue to dismiss one or other of the theories such as this prime example.

 

The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2024-08-15/column-the-covid-lab-leak-claim-isnt-just-an-attack-on-science-but-a-threat-to-public-health

33 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

It was just a lame attempt to blame the messenger WSJ.

 

The same theme was published by Forbes back in Feb

 

Timeline: How The Covid Lab Leak Origin Story Went From 'Conspiracy Theory' To Government Debate

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marisadellatto/2023/02/26/timeline-how-the-covid-lab-leak-origin-story-went-from-conspiracy-theory-to-government-debate/

 

EDIT: Oh look below, another one blaming the messenger.........lol

Thanks for this usefull timeline.

Two remarks:

- It provides insights on politicians' statements or institutional positions, but actually few scientific substance (ok, that was not the aim),

- a reminder that the lab-leaked theory is not restricted to the artificially created virus option.

Quote from the article

"The theory’s adherents usually believe the coronavirus either evolved in nature and was being studied at a lab in Wuhan before it accidentally leaked out, or was artificially created by researchers before it escaped—though the latter theory has been heavily contested by many experts.

2 hours ago, CallumWK said:

 

Because it doesn't fits with his woke mind.

 

....and there it is.....the answer to everything......woke.

8 minutes ago, candide said:

Thanks for this usefull timeline.

Two remarks:

- It provides insights on politicians' statements or institutional positions, but actually few scientific substance (ok, that was not the aim),

- a reminder that the lab-leaked theory is not restricted to the artificially created virus option.

Quote from the article

"The theory’s adherents usually believe the coronavirus either evolved in nature and was being studied at a lab in Wuhan before it accidentally leaked out, or was artificially created by researchers before it escaped—though the latter theory has been heavily contested by many experts.

My pleasure, and yes I agree. There's lots in that timeline that can be referenced for both sides of the debate.

The problem with many of the lab leak proponents is that they're often political partisans (or right-wing echoing news outlets) who continue to advance their theory pretty much in the absence of any real pertinent facts to directly support it.

 

I see the nonsense Republican-led U.S. House subcommittee investigating the origins of COVID issued its final report earlier this month concluding COVID came from a lab leak.

 

But as the following Science journal article on the Republicans' report notes:

 

"The committee’s 520-page report, released on 2 December, offers no new direct evidence of a lab leak, but summarizes a circumstantial case, including that the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) used NIAID money to conduct “gain-of-function” studies that modified distantly related coronaviruses. [emphasis added]

...

Democrats on the panel released their own report challenging many of their colleagues’ conclusions about COVID-19 origins. They conclude, for example, that the viruses studied at WIV with EcoHealth funding were too distantly related to SARS-CoV-2 to cause the pandemic."

 

https://www.science.org/content/article/house-panel-concludes-covid-19-pandemic-came-lab-leak

 

That final conclusion reported above is one that Dr. Fauci and other scientists have repeatedly reinforced.

 

"The definition of “gain of function” covers both general research and especially risky experiments to “enhance” the ability of potentially pandemic pathogens to spread or cause severe disease in humans. Fauci stressed he [in rejecting Republicans' claims] was using the risky experiment definition, saying “it would be molecularly impossible” for the bat viruses studied with EcoHealth’s funds to be turned into the virus that caused the pandemic." [emphasis added]

 

https://apnews.com/article/fauci-covid-pandemic-origin-congress-a66625482f25824476ee315484790230

 

 

Another example of the media pushing the its a conspiracy angle for anyone that doesn't believe the narrative.

 

U.S. government debunks COVID lab-leak conspiracy theory, enraging conspiracy theorists

The lab-leak conspiracists were certain that the report would validate their contentions, for which there has never been any valid scientific evidence.

https://archive.ph/1EKe8

https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2023-06-26/u-s-government-debunks-covid-lab-leak-conspiracy-theory-enraging-conspiracy-theorists

The absence of actual supporting facts and pertinent evidence won't stop the outspoken conspiracy theorists from continuing to peddle their fact-deficient wares, no matter what term anyone wants to use to characterize them.

 

But if any of them ever actually come up with any real and scientifically relevant direct evidence, I'm sure the scientific community at large certainly would be willing to examine what they've got.

 

But for now, a fair summary of the known facts and scientific expertise leaves the COVID origin issue as a matter that remains in dispute, but with more of the actual evidence and expert opinion leaning toward the natural cause theory.

 

And that's the way it's going to remain, until and unless something new and credible emerges to meaningfully move the needle on that debate.

 

 

More of the same narrative that caused so much divide, doing their best to discredit a book on the subject and insisting it was zoonotic

 

These authors wanted to push the COVID-19 lab-leak theory. Instead they exposed its weaknesses

Yet if the authors were truly concerned with the origin of COVID-19, they would give proper due to the prevailing scientific judgment about it: that COVID was “zoonotic,” spilling over from infected animals to humans via natural contact the way most viruses known to science have reached humankind.

https://archive.ph/mVXyw

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/books/story/2021-11-15/these-authors-wanted-to-promote-the-lab-leak-theory-of-covids-origin-instead-they-exposed-its-weaknesses

1 hour ago, koolkarl said:

I do believe the US knows the exact origin of kung flu but for some strange reason is protecting China.  Perhaps if they

released the truth, the entire world would revolt against China in every way imaginable. 

More like US govt. invested by proxy organisation in the level 4 lab to research novel coronavirus in China.

 

NIMBY high risk research that came home to roost.

 

Simple.

This is all a red herring. It doesn't matter whether COVID originated one way or the other; we know that both a leak and the infected animal theory are possible. What matters is that we try to avoid new pandemics no matter how they may originate.

58 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

This is one of the more recent scientific reports I've seen on the COVID origins issue, published in the journal Cell in September 2024 by an international team of researchers:

 

Genetic tracing of market wildlife and viruses at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic

...

Discussion

"Extensive epidemiological evidence supports wildlife trade at the Huanan market as the most likely conduit for the COVID-19 pandemic’s origin.^3,76 Herein, we both describe metagenomic evidence for identification of the plausible intermediate host species at the market, and analyze metagenomic and phylogenetic evidence that further supports the hypothesis of zoonotic emergence at this location.

...

Retrospective studies should be performed, where possible, testing the species described here throughout the animal supply chains of Southeast Asia and southern China, through which in all scientific likelihood the COVID-19 pandemic emerged."

 

https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(24)00901-2

 

And as reported in more layman's terms by the BBC:

Genetic ghosts suggest Covid’s market origins

19 September 2024

 

"A team of scientists say it is “beyond reasonable doubt” the Covid pandemic started with infected animals sold at a market, rather than a laboratory leak. They were analysing hundreds of samples collected from Wuhan, China, in January 2020.

 

The results identify a shortlist of animals – including racoon dogs, civets and bamboo rats – as potential sources of the pandemic.

 

Despite even highlighting one market stall as a hotspot of both animals and coronavirus, the study cannot provide definitive proof."

 

(more)

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy8095xjg4po

 

 

The Cell paper is contested.  Given the stakes it would be prudent to wait on a response from the journal before accepting the authors “beyond reasonable doubt” conclusion.

 

https://biosafetynow.substack.com/p/crits-christoph-et-al-2024-retraction

or meet in the middle... a covid research animal from the lab was sold to the wet market.

Haha.

 

Actually, talking about lab-leaked is obscuring the real issue, which is natural evolution.ution vs created by researchers.

-  natural evolution, whether from the Wuhan market or leaked from the samples collected by the lab. It seems to be currently the dominant scientific explanation.

-  created by researchers in a lab (then leaked). This is currently not the dominant scientific explanation.