Coronavirus Origins: Covid-19 Wasn’t Produced In A Lab, Scientists Conclude
Author: “The virus is the product of natural evolution, ending any speculation about deliberate genetic engineering.”
JUPITER, Fla. — Over the course of this Covid-19 ordeal, a number of outlandish conspiracy theories have emerged that the virus was produced in a Chinese, Canadian, or American lab. Conspiracy theories have become an increasingly common part of everyday life in recent years, but a new study on Covid-19’s origins is disproving this theory. A team of international researchers have concluded that the novel coronavirus has entirely natural origins through evolution.
Public genome sequence data on Covid-19, as well as similar viruses, was extensively analyzed for this study. The results show absolutely no indication that the virus was produced artificially or in a lab setting.
“By comparing the available genome sequence data for known coronavirus strains, we can firmly determine that SARS-CoV-2 originated through natural processes,” comments co-author Kristian Andersen, PhD, an associate professor of immunology and microbiology at Scripps Research, in a release.
Researchers from Columbia University, the University of Edinburgh, and the University of Sydney also worked on this project.
Coronaviruses in general are nothing new. The two most recent examples of a new coronavirus popping up are the SARS outbreak in Asia around 2003 and MERS in the Middle East in 2012. This new strain, largely being referred to as Covid-19, was only brought to the WHO’s attention on New Year’s Eve 2019.
Chinese scientists were the first to sequence the new virus’ genome, and immediately made their findings available to scientists all over the world. Incredibly, this data indeed indicates that Covid-19 has spread to hundreds of thousands after initially being “introduced” to just one person.
It was this genetic template that allowed the study’s authors to investigate the virus’ origins. They discovered that Covid-19’s receptor-binding domain (RBD), a kind of “grappling hook” that attaches itself to host cells, had evolved to target a specific molecular feature of human cells. That feature is called ACE2, and it is a receptor involved in maintaining regular blood pressure. The research team believe this development was the work of natural selection, not some type of genetic engineering.
Why? The virus appears to be so efficient at its newly evolved skill, that it is essentially impossible that modern science could have created such a monstrosity.
CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE TO OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER & GET THE LATEST STUDIES FROM STUDYFINDS.ORG BY EMAIL!
Additionally, if some nefarious entity were really attempting to create a deadly virus, they would have based it off of a known illness-causing virus. Researchers say that Covid-19’s molecular structure is quite different from previous coronaviruses, and more closely mimics viruses found in bats and pangolins.
“These two features of the virus, the mutations in the RBD portion of the spike protein and its distinct backbone, rules out laboratory manipulation as a potential origin for SARS-CoV-2” Andersen says.
“It is crucially important to bring an evidence-based view to the rumors that have been circulating about the origins of the virus (SARS-CoV-2) causing COVID-19,” adds Josie Golding, PhD, epidemics lead at UK-based Wellcome Trust. “They conclude that the virus is the product of natural evolution, ending any speculation about deliberate genetic engineering.”
So, what are Covid-19’s true origins? The study’s authors have two main theories. The first is that the virus evolved pathogenically through natural selection within a non-human host and then made the jump to people. If this was the case, it’s likely that the virus evolved within bats, made the jump to an intermediary host, and then was passed onto a human.
The second theory is that the virus was largely non-pathogenic before making the transition to humans, and only evolved into it’s current deadly form within the human population.
At this point, researchers believe it’s nearly impossible to determine which of the two scenarios occurred. That being said, we should all hope for scenario two. If the novel coronavirus did in fact transfer over to humans already in its fully evolved pathogenic form, that would raise the chances of further outbreaks in the future.
https://www.studyfinds.org/coronavirus-origins-covid-19-wasnt-produced-in-a-lab-scientists-conclude/
The comments section anons
Very hard to dig on a non-profit's source of funding when their name is Study Finds.
Editorial Team & Contributors
Steve Fink, Advising Editor
Steve Fink is a longtime CBS journalist who serves as the Director of News Programming and Promotion for CBS Local by day. He previously served as Managing Editor of CBSNewYork.com and WCBSTV.com before joining the company’s corporate digital team. His passion for digital news standards and trends, combined with his love for news-oriented studies made him an ideal advisor for the content and vision of StudyFinds.org.
Current StudyFinds.org Contributors:
John Anderer: Originally from Long Island, John has been writing professionally for over 7 years. When he isn’t writing about the latest scientific studies, you can find him working on his first horror novel.
Terra Marquette is a Denver-area freelance writer and editor. Her love of almost every subject led her to a degree in journalism, followed by science-based writing and editing as well as fact-filled library research. In her free time, she enjoys long nature walks and creating healthy meals for her family.
Ben Renner is freelance writer based in Denver, Colorado. He manages and edits websites and produces content marketing pieces and website content for a variety of clients in multiple industries. Ben is a huge sports fan and Seattle native. Connect with him on LinkedIn.
Jacob Roshgadol is a neuroscience research assistant in New York City. He’s really interested in understanding how consciousness emerges from all of the processes taking place in the brain. He’s passionate about science education and wants to help make science accessible to everyone.
Contributors who write under ghost names or who do not wish to have bylines are included under the StudyFinds author name.
Posts are written to explain the findings of each study, however StudyFinds.org does not endorse, agree, nor disagree with any studies posted. We welcome and encourage our readers to leave comments whether you support or oppose a study, however we request such comments to be written with respect to opposing beliefs.
https://www.studyfinds.org/authors/
Call for dig on studyfinds.org
Steve Fink? Seriously?