What is known about the Wuhan laboratory, center of the very “unlikely” theory about the origin of Covid-19

The team of the World Health Organization (WHO) who investigated the origin of coronavirus in Wuhan in January concluded that it is “extremely unlikely” that the pathogen originated in the maximum security laboratory of the Chinese city.

A WHO report, seen by AFP before its publication, considers that the covid-19 was probably passed from a bat to humans via an intermediary animal, practically ruling out the theory of a laboratory leak.

But this may not end up ruling out the theory that then-US President Donald Trump and others put forward, and which gained weight with Chinese secrecy and its inability to determine the origin.

Here are some key facts about the laboratory at the Institute of Virology of Wuhan.

High security

The institute houses the Virus Cultivation Center, the most important virus bank in Asia where more than 1,500 varieties are preserved and is capable of handling class 4 pathogens (P4, the highest possible), that is, dangerous viruses that are transmitted person to person, like Ebola.

The P4 lab cost 300 million yuan ($ 42 million) and was completed in 2015, although it didn’t open until 2018.

The institute also has a P3 level laboratory, which includes various coronaviruses and which has been operational since 2012.

State-of-the-art research

The institute studies some of the world’s most dangerous diseases and has previously investigated the relationship between bats and disease outbreaks in China.

Its scientists helped shed light on the COVID-19 pathogen at the dawn of the outbreak in Wuhan.

In February 2020, a group of researchers published a study that concluded that the genetic makeup of the new virus was 80% similar to that of coronavirus of SARS, and 96% were identical to the coronavirus found in bats.

Many scientists think that the virus that causes COVID-19 originated in bats and may have passed to humans through an unknown mammal in late 2019, at the Wuhan food market where wild species were sold for human consumption.

Liang Wannian, the head of the Chinese scientists of the WHO mission, said at the end of the mission that animal transmission remains the most likely route, but that “the reservoir host remains to be identified.”

The lab leak

Earlier, US diplomatic cables, echoed by the Washington Post, had revealed concerns in Washington about security measures at the Wuhan laboratory.

Shi Zhengli, one of China’s leading experts on bat coronavirus and deputy director of the P4 laboratory, said in an interview with the American Scientific Journal in June 2020 that she was initially concerned that the virus had escaped from her laboratory. .

But later checks revealed that the genetic sequence differs from the viruses in his lab, and Shi said he would “bet his life” that he did not escape from there, according to the Chinese state press.

But this theory was maintained thanks to Trump’s ‘likes’ on social networks. His Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisted last year that there was “significant evidence” that the virus came from the laboratory, although he did not present it.

Publications such as Le Monde and the Wall Street Journal, as well as scientists from Harvard and Stanford, kept the theory alive by publishing articles and reports that claimed it was a possibility.

WHO conclusions

The mission of the team of the WHO in Wuhan It included a stop at the Institute of Virology, where they met with Chinese scientists, including Shi.

Team leader Peter Ben Embarek said at the end of the mission that the theory of a laboratory leak was “highly unlikely” and that it would not be among the “hypotheses” they will suggest “for future studies.”

The mission found nothing to reverse the general consensus in the scientific community about a natural origin of the pathogen.

Doubts persist

But questions about the lab persist. Critics say the WHO team had its hands tied by the strict protocols imposed by the Chinese hosts.

The team members spent four hours in the virology institute, and only one hour in the market, after having spent two weeks in their quarantined hotel without being able to set foot in the city.

In an interview with AFP, Ben Embarek expressed his “frustration” at the lack of access to raw data during his stay in China.

US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan expressed “deep concern” about the way the mission was carried out and urged China to make available “its data from the early days of the outbreak.”