Many authoritative Chinese epidemiologists call for WHO to trace origin of COVID-19 virus in multiple countries

Jan 23, 2021
Many authoritative Chinese epidemiologists call for WHO to trace origin of COVID-19 virus in multiple countries (in Chinese)
Translated (personally but not officiallly) by: Sunshine Li, China

As WHO's international expert team has finished more than half of their China mission in tracing the origin of the COVID-19 virus, many authoritative Chinese medical and health experts stressed on February 4 that WHO's next mission should be to conduct the tracing work in multiple countries and locations in the world. They told the "Global Times" reporters that the source of the virus is a continuous and complex scientific issue that requires international cooperation. "Wuhan should only be the first step."

After the quarantined medical observation was lifted on January 28, the WHO expert team visited Wuhan Jinyintan Hospital, Hubei Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine Hospital, South China Seafood Wholesale Market and many other places in the past few days and communicated with early patients. On February 3, the expert team also visited the Wuhan Institute of Virology and stayed there for nearly 4 hours. The expert team member and American virologist Peter Dassak said that they had "frank and open" discussions with Chinese scientists including Shi Zhengli and discussed many "key issues."Another member of the expert team, Deputy Director of the Pasteur Institute in St. Petersburg, Russia, Dedekov, said after the visit, “I don't know who has been criticizing them. This laboratory is equipped with sophisticated equipment. I can hardly imagine anything to leak out from here."

According to media reports, the expert team may draft a preliminary report when it ends its trip in China next week, which may include the latest information they have learned in Wuhan.

Meanwhile, a number of authoritative Chinese epidemiology experts-including some experts closely related to China's CDC-have issued a common call: after the Wuhan trip, WHO should also consider making a global tracing plan as soon as possible and discussing the next probe destination(s) in order to obtain more information and data to solve the hard problem of the origin of COVID-19 virus.

Zeng Guang, former chief scientist of epidemiology of China's CDC, told the Global Times that it is recommended that WHO develop a global tracing plan based on chronological order, such as tracking the occurrence of the COVID-19 virus in blood samples collected in 2019 or even earlier in the related areas or countries and clarify whether the purpose of the tracing is to find "patient zero" or animals. "At present, WHO has not yet shown such a clear idea."

And Lu Hongzhou, a member of the National New Coronary Pneumonia Treatment Expert Group and a professor at the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center, told reporter that if the tracing is not carried out at multiple locations around the world, no results will be achieved. Lu cited a research jointly conducted by the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Center and Ruijin Hospital Affiliated to Shanghai Jiaotong University in May last year and published in the journal Nature. According to the analysis of clinical, molecular and immunological data of the 326 cases admitted by the Center between January 20 and February 25 last year, the COVID-19 virus can be divided into two major types, which evolved independently from a common ancestor. If Wuhan were the origin, the virus types should be very consistent, and there should be no differentiations and mutations. "Wuhan is an international metropolitan. People have very close interactions. The virus could have come from anywhere."

With the continuous advancement of research on the COVID-19 virus, many clues, reports and studies have shown that the virus have appeared in many places in the world in 2019, and this may change the timeline of the development of this pandemic: last June , the University of Barcelona in Spain announced that a research team of the University detected the virus in local sewage samples collected in March 2019; in November last year, Italian researchers published a paper stating that the virus could have been spreading in Italy as early as September 2019, nearly 5 months earlier than the first confirmed case was reported in Italy; in December last year, the US CDC released a government study verifying that someone in the US was infected with the virus in mid-December 2019. In addition, France, Brazil and other countries have also found earlier cases before Wuhan officially reported the first confirmed case.

Wang Guangfa, director of the Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine at Beijing/Peking University First Hospital, told reporter that WHO experts should conduct the tracing in Spain, Italy, USA, Brazil and other countries where earlier cases have been found. He also emphasized that WHO's research and probe should not be aimed at a certain country, nor should it be preconceived. “The tracing should not be a tool for international political brawls.”

Also making this call are Feng Duojia, president of the China Vaccine Industry Association, Yang Zhanqiu, a professor at the Institute of Virology of Wuhan University Medical Department, and an anonymous expert from China's CDC. Yang Zhanqiu believes that there are currently many strains of the COVID-19 virus, and different strains may have different evolution paths and sources. This also makes it very important to carry out the tracing at multiple locations in the world. USA currently has the most types of strains, and is most suitable for tracing studies. Feng Duojia said that the hope to find the origin cannot be placed only in Wuhan.

"WHO should take the lead in making more research on the origin of the virus." The above-mentioned anonymous expert of China's CDC told reporter that future specific tracing plans require adequate discussions among member states. "China has already set a good beginning."

"USA must be the top focus of the tracing work," Zeng Guang said, USA should set an example for the virus tracing like China and invite WHO to USA for the tracing.
Jul 2, 2020
Please make responsible statements and provide the sources.

Your statements and claims are all very misleading and I have already replied to similar claims you make in other posts on this site but you go on repeating them without evidence

University of Barcelona in Spain announced that a research team of the University detected the virus in local sewage samples collected in March 2019;
they ran tests on samples taken between January 2018 and December 2019 and found the [faint possible] presence of the virus genome in one of them, collected on March 12, 2019

[No subsequent research has indicated this to be other than a one off false result. Other tests show Covid-19 appearing in wastewater from November 2019 onwards in a range of locations which is still consistent with early spreading from a Wuhan origin]

Claire Crossan
Research Fellow, Virology, Glasgow Caledonian University

They had a positive result for the March 2019 sample in one of the three genes tested – the RdRp gene. They screened for two regions of this gene and both were only detected around the 39th cycle of amplification. (PCR tests become less “specific” with increasing rounds of amplification. Scientists generally use 40 to 45 rounds of amplification.)

There are several explanations for this positive result. One is that SARS-CoV-2 is present in the sewage at a very low level. Another is that the test reaction was accidentally contaminated with SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory. This sometimes happens in labs as positive samples are regularly being handled, and it can be difficult to prevent very small traces of positive sample contaminating others.

Another explanation is that there is other RNA or DNA in the sample that resembles the test target site enough for it to give a positive result at the 39th cycle of amplification.

Further tests need to be carried out to conclude that the sample contains SARS-CoV-2, and a finding of that magnitude would need to be replicated separately by independent laboratories.

Reasons to be circumspect
A curious thing about this finding is that it disagrees with epidemiological data about the virus. The authors don’t cite reports of a spike in the number of respiratory disease cases in the local population following the date of the sampling.

Also, we know SARS-CoV-2 to be highly transmissible, at least in its current form. If this result is a true positive it suggests the virus was present in the population at a high enough incidence to be detected in an 800ml sample of sewage, but then not present at a high enough incidence to be detected for nine months, when no control measures were in place.

Yang Zhanqiu believes that there are currently many strains of the COVID-19 virus, and different strains may have different evolution paths and sources.
So far the evidence shows that there was only one original type of Wuhan Covid-19 virus circulating around the world in 2019 and early 2020.

Material mutations only occurred later in 2020

06 May 2020 08:00:45 BST
Analysis work from the MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research provides evidence that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has not mutated into different types.

.........only one type of the virus is currently circulating. Their research is published in the journal Virus Evolution.

Dr Oscar MacLean, from the MRC-University of Glasgow Centre for Virus Research, said: “By analysing the extensive genetic sequence variation present in the genomes of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the evolutionary analysis shows why these claims that multiple types of the virus are currently circulating are unfounded.”

expert team member and American virologist Peter Daszak said that they had "frank and open" discussions with Chinese scientists including Shi Zhengli and discussed many "key issues."
Peter Daszak has a history going back to at least 2006 of working with WIV and Professor Shi, providing them with financing and support and publishing joint work with Professor Shi and others connected with WIV and is totally conflicted


Professor Richard Ebright has noted, “For persons who were directly involved in funding, promoting, and/or performing bat coronavirus research and bat coronavirus gain-of-function research at WIV, avoiding a possible finding of culpability for triggering a pandemic is a powerful motivator.” And Daszak would be at the very top of the list of those involved in funding, promoting and collaborating in that research.

More broadly, as Ebright also notes, Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance has received over $100 million in funding from US government agencies for a variety of virus surveillance and virus gain of function work – the kind of work that could be brought into serious question if Daszak found any evidence it contributed to causing the pandemic.

How did The Lancet manage to overlook such an enormous conflict of interest, Ebright wonders, while Dr Filippa Lentzos, an expert on biological threats at King’s College London, tweeted, “Goodness. I can't imagine a lead investigator with more vested interests!”

Some of the joint work of Prof Shi and Peter Daszak

Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs. Sachs is a former special advisor to the UN, the former head of the Millennium Villages Project, and was recently appointed Chair of the newly-formed EAT Lancet Commission on the pandemic.

In September, Sachs’ commission named Daszak to head up its committee on the pandemic’s origins.

Daszak is also on the WHO’s committee to investigate the pandemic’s origin.

He is the only individual on both committees.

These leadership positions are not the only reason why Peter Daszak is such a central figure in the COVID-19 pandemic, however. His appointment dismayed many of those who are aware that Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance funded bat coronavirus research, including virus collection, at the Wuhan Institute for Virology (WIV)

Last edited:
Nov 12, 2020
Per the famous often used, paraphrased quote from "Hamlet", by William Shakespeare. "The CCP doth protest too much, methinks". Also, my opinion as a potential victim: "Shoot" the covid-19 via vaccinations/vaccines first, ask questions later.


Latest posts