🕷️ Crawler Inspector

URL Lookup

Direct Parameter Lookup

Raw Queries and Responses

1. Shard Calculation

Query:

Response:

Calculated Shard: 68 (from laksa055)

2. Crawled Status Check

Query:

curl -X POST \
  'http://laksa068.int.ahrefs:8124/' \
  -H 'Content-Type: text/plain' \
  -H 'X-ClickHouse-Database: crawler3' \
  -H 'Authorization: Basic YXBpOg==' \
  -d 'SELECT getAhrefsURLFromUnparsed(src_unparsed) AS found_url, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(download_stamp), 0) AS crawl_time, ifNull(toUnixTimestamp(props_url_first_seen), 0) AS first_indexed_time, download_http_code AS http_code, src_unparsed AS src_unparsed, src_root_hash AS src_root_hash, history_drop_reason AS history_drop_reason, meta_title AS meta_title, meta_descriptions AS meta_descriptions, attrs_boilerpipe_text AS attrs_boilerpipe_text, attrs_markdown AS attrs_markdown, attrs_readable_markdown AS attrs_readable_markdown, meta_canonical AS meta_canonical FROM crawler3.page_info_local FINAL PREWHERE (src_root_hash, src_unparsed) IN ((getAhrefsRootHashFromUnparsed(getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/\')), getAhrefsUnparsedNoserviceFromURL(\'https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/\'))) FORMAT JSONEachRow'

Response:

{"found_url":"https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/","crawl_time":1776126506,"first_indexed_time":1738007967,"http_code":200,"src_unparsed":"news,healthpolicy-watch!\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/ s443","src_root_hash":"2346392570040768268","history_drop_reason":null,"meta_title":"CIA Report Reignites COVID-19 Origins Debate – But China’s Refusal To Share Evidence Stymies Any Conclusion - Health Policy Watch","meta_descriptions":["The weekend release of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low"],"attrs_boilerpipe_text":"The Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021.\nThe weekend\nrelease\nof the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate.\nOn the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats.\nSome researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally.\nThe other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan.\nThey argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold.  SARS-CoV2 is\nnot the same as the coronavirus in bats\n, although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans.\nVirus origins team\nThe World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a\nteam of independent scientists\nto examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021.\nThe WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021.\nThe origins team\nreport\nin March 2021 posed\nfour possible hypotheses\nabout the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”.\nBut the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i\nn a series of open letters to WHO\n. \nWHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus\nsaid candidly\nin July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out.\n“There was a premature push to refute one of the [origins] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,”\nsaid Tedros\nduring a WHO media briefing in July 2021.\nChina rebuffs scientific advisory group \nThe WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the\nfirst mission to Wuhan\n. \nHowever,\nChina refused SAGO’s request\nin July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods).\n“We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission.\n“We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said.  \nThe joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021.\nThe CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence,\naccording to reports\n.\nHowever, the CIA added that it  “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”.\nIn 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a\nUS Congress sub-committee\nin December 2024. \n‘Gain of function’ research?\nSome of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds.\nThey allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “\ngain of function” research\nthat involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures.\nA 2018\ngrant application\nsubmitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky.\nChina rejects CIA report\nOver the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility.\n“We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy,\nLiu Pengyu, told Associated Press\n.\nThe\nfailure of the Chinese government\nto allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely.\nHowever, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research.\nImage Credits:\nCNN\n,\nCGTN\n,\nWHO\n.\nCombat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South.  Our  growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.","attrs_markdown":"[Skip to content](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/#content)\n\n[![Health Policy Watch](https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/08\/HPW-Logo-Full.png?fit=1099%2C206&ssl=1)](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/)\n\n*menu*\n\n- [Home](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/ \"Home\")\n- [About Us](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/about\/ \"About Us\")\n\n[![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/themes\/hpw2018\/images\/header-twitter.svg)](https:\/\/twitter.com\/HealthPolicyW)\n\n[![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/themes\/hpw2018\/images\/header-facebook.svg)](https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/HealthPolicyWatch)\n\n- [Antimicrobial Resistance](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/anti-microbial-resistance\/ \"Antimicrobial Resistance\")\n- [Infectious Diseases](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/ \"Infectious Diseases\")\n- [Pandemics & Emergencies](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/pandemics\/ \"Pandemics & Emergencies\")\n- [Non-Communicable Diseases](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/noncommunicable-diseases\/ \"Non-Communicable Diseases\")\n- [Health, Climate & SDGs](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/health-in-sdgs\/ \"Health, Climate & SDGs\")\n\n[![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/themes\/hpw2018\/images\/header-twitter.svg)](https:\/\/twitter.com\/HealthPolicyW)   [![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/themes\/hpw2018\/images\/header-facebook.svg)](https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/HealthPolicyWatch)\n\nCIA Report Reignites COVID-19 Origins Debate – But China’s Refusal to Share Evidence Stymies Any Conclusion\n\n[COVID-19](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/covid-19\/) 27\/01\/2025 • [Kerry Cullinan](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/author\/kerry-cullinan\/ \"Posts by Kerry Cullinan\")\n\n### Share this:\n- [Share on X (Opens in new window) X](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=twitter)\n- [Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=linkedin)\n- [Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=facebook)\n- [Print (Opens in new window) Print](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/#print?share=print)\n- [Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=bluesky)\n\n![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/Screen-Shot-2021-02-05-at-4.15.36-PM-1024x461.png)\n\nThe Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021.\n\nThe weekend [release](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu) of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate.\n\nOn the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats.\n\nSome researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally.\n\nThe other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan.\n\nThey argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold. SARS-CoV2 is [not the same as the coronavirus in bats](https:\/\/bmcmedgenomics.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12920-022-01208-w#:~:text=Main%20text-,Origin%20of%20SARS-CoV-2,is%2096%25%20%5B5%5D.), although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans.\n\n### **Virus origins team**\nThe World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a [team of independent scientists](https:\/\/www.who.int\/emergencies\/diseases\/novel-coronavirus-2019\/origins-of-the-virus) to examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021.\n\n![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Screen-Shot-2021-01-13-at-11.10.53-PM-1024x559.png)\n\nThe WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021.\n\nThe origins team [report](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/sars-cov2-virus-origins-report\/) in March 2021 posed [four possible hypotheses](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/sars-cov-2-origins-report-finally-released\/) about the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”.\n\nBut the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i[n a series of open letters to WHO](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/86225-2\/).\n\nWHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus [said candidly](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china\/) in July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out.\n\n“There was a premature push to refute one of the \\[origins\\] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,” [said Tedros](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china\/) during a WHO media briefing in July 2021.\n\n### **China rebuffs scientific advisory group**\nThe WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the [first mission to Wuhan](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/who-plays-down-china-origins-research-expectations\/).\n\nHowever, [China refused SAGO’s request](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation\/) in July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods).\n\n“We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission.\n\n“We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said.\n\n![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/Screen-Shot-2021-02-09-at-11.59.08-AM-1024x524.png)\n\nThe joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021.\n\nThe CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence, [according to reports](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu).\n\nHowever, the CIA added that it “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”.\n\nIn 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a [US Congress sub-committee](https:\/\/www.aljazeera.com\/news\/2024\/12\/3\/us-lawmakers-back-covid-lab-leak-theory-after-two-year-probe) in December 2024.\n\n### **‘Gain of function’ research?**\nSome of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds.\n\nThey allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “[gain of function” research](https:\/\/www.news-medical.net\/health\/What-is-Gain-of-Function-Research.aspx#:~:text=Introduction%20to%20Gain-of-function,-Gain-of-function&text=GOF%20is%20performed%20to%20understand,and%20therapies%20to%20be%20explored.) that involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures.\n\nA 2018 [grant application](https:\/\/theintercept.com\/2021\/09\/23\/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa\/) submitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky.\n\n### **China rejects CIA report**\nOver the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility.\n\n“We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy, [Liu Pengyu, told Associated Press](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu).\n\nThe [failure of the Chinese government](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation\/) to allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely.\n\nHowever, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research.\n\nImage Credits: [CNN](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=WlUQM8Zo-Ms&fbclid=IwAR2D8yDQUlNvQJ1C-B9tNIRgCUleejlwFvMMeUJM0V2_6NZXkjrnv_E9Bd4), [CGTN](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3iZkFgmYhC8), [WHO](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/).\n\n### Share this:\n- [Share on X (Opens in new window) X](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=twitter)\n- [Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=linkedin)\n- [Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=facebook)\n- [Print (Opens in new window) Print](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/#print?share=print)\n- [Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/?share=bluesky)\n\nCombat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.\n\nPosted in [Content type](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/content-type\/), [COVID-19](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/covid-19\/), [COVID-19 Science](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/covid-19-science\/), [Infectious Diseases](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/), [News](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/content-type\/news\/), [SARS-CoV2 Origins](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/infectious-disease\/covid-19-science\/sars-cov2-origins\/)\n\nRelated\n\n[WHO Expert Group: Step up Typhoid Vaccination in High Risk Regions, Fewer Polio Doses in Low-Risk Areas](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/who-expert-group-advises-on-typhoid-covid-19-and-polio-vaccinations\/)\n\n[Medicines & Vaccines](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/drug-and-diagnostics-development\/medicines-and-vaccines\/)\n\n18\/03\/2026\n***\n[A Flag Recaptured: US Exit from WHO Highlights Anger Over COVID-19 Pandemic](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/a-flag-recaptured-us-exit-from-who-highlights-anger-over-covid-19-pandemic\/)\n\n[World Health Organization](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/institutions\/world-health-organization\/)\n\n27\/01\/2026\n***\n[Most Vaccine Hesitancy can be Successfully Overcome, New Lancet Study Finds](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/vaccine-hesitancy-temporary-for-majority\/)\n\n[Pandemic Preparedness](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/pandemics\/preparedness\/)\n\n14\/01\/2026\n***\nDo you really care about access and equity in global health? Your contributions are urgently needed to support our mission in open access global health journalism and our network of correspondents in Africa, Asia, New York and Geneva. Their reporting connects the dots between the regional realities and the big global debates. Every contribution - big or small - helps us sustain our reporting for the benefit of all.\n\nRelated\n\n[WHO Expert Group: Step up Typhoid Vaccination in High Risk Regions, Fewer Polio Doses in Low-Risk Areas](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/who-expert-group-advises-on-typhoid-covid-19-and-polio-vaccinations\/)\n\n[Medicines & Vaccines](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/drug-and-diagnostics-development\/medicines-and-vaccines\/)\n\n18\/03\/2026\n***\n[A Flag Recaptured: US Exit from WHO Highlights Anger Over COVID-19 Pandemic](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/a-flag-recaptured-us-exit-from-who-highlights-anger-over-covid-19-pandemic\/)\n\n[World Health Organization](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/institutions\/world-health-organization\/)\n\n27\/01\/2026\n***\n[Most Vaccine Hesitancy can be Successfully Overcome, New Lancet Study Finds](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/vaccine-hesitancy-temporary-for-majority\/)\n\n[Pandemic Preparedness](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/category\/pandemics\/preparedness\/)\n\n14\/01\/2026\n***\nDo you really care about access and equity in global health? Your contributions are urgently needed to support our mission in open access global health journalism and our network of correspondents in Africa, Asia, New York and Geneva. Their reporting connects the dots between the regional realities and the big global debates. Every contribution - big or small - helps us sustain our reporting for the benefit of all.\n\nThis site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy.  [Our Cookies and Privacy Policy](http:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.org\/privacy-policy\/)\n\nSign up for free news alerts\n\nSignup Link\n\nContact Us\n\ninfo@healthpolicy-watch.org\n\n1-5 Route des Morillions CP 2100\n\nGeneva 1211, Switzerland\n\n\\+41 22 791 67 28\n\n[About](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/about\/)\n\n[Privacy Policy](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/privacy-policy\/)\n\n[Archives](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/archive\/)\n\nStaff Access\n\n[Log in](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-login.php)\n\n[Entries RSS](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/post-feeds)\n\n[Comments RSS](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/comments-page)\n\n[Wordpress.org](https:\/\/wordpress.org\/)\n\nSupported by\n\nSponsors\n\n[![Wellcome](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/Wellcome_logo_Black.jpg)](https:\/\/wellcome.org\/)\n\n[![CeHDI](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/CeHDI_Logo.jpg)](https:\/\/www.cehdi.org\/)\n\n[![Geneva](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/geneva.png)](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/about\/)\n\n[![Loro](https:\/\/www.loro.ch\/themes\/logo.svg)](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/about\/)\n\nCopyright c 2020 Global Policy Reporting\n\n##\n##\nLoading Comments...\n\nYou must be [logged in](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/) to post a comment.\n###","attrs_readable_markdown":"![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/Screen-Shot-2021-02-05-at-4.15.36-PM-1024x461.png)\n\nThe Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021.\n\nThe weekend [release](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu) of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate.\n\nOn the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats.\n\nSome researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally.\n\nThe other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan.\n\nThey argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold. SARS-CoV2 is [not the same as the coronavirus in bats](https:\/\/bmcmedgenomics.biomedcentral.com\/articles\/10.1186\/s12920-022-01208-w#:~:text=Main%20text-,Origin%20of%20SARS-CoV-2,is%2096%25%20%5B5%5D.), although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans.\n\n### **Virus origins team**\nThe World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a [team of independent scientists](https:\/\/www.who.int\/emergencies\/diseases\/novel-coronavirus-2019\/origins-of-the-virus) to examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021.\n\n![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/01\/Screen-Shot-2021-01-13-at-11.10.53-PM-1024x559.png)\n\nThe WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021.\n\nThe origins team [report](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/sars-cov2-virus-origins-report\/) in March 2021 posed [four possible hypotheses](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/sars-cov-2-origins-report-finally-released\/) about the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”.\n\nBut the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i[n a series of open letters to WHO](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/86225-2\/).\n\nWHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus [said candidly](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china\/) in July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out.\n\n“There was a premature push to refute one of the \\[origins\\] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,” [said Tedros](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china\/) during a WHO media briefing in July 2021.\n\n### **China rebuffs scientific advisory group**\nThe WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the [first mission to Wuhan](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/who-plays-down-china-origins-research-expectations\/).\n\nHowever, [China refused SAGO’s request](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation\/) in July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods).\n\n“We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission.\n\n“We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said.\n\n![](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/Screen-Shot-2021-02-09-at-11.59.08-AM-1024x524.png)\n\nThe joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021.\n\nThe CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence, [according to reports](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu).\n\nHowever, the CIA added that it “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”.\n\nIn 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a [US Congress sub-committee](https:\/\/www.aljazeera.com\/news\/2024\/12\/3\/us-lawmakers-back-covid-lab-leak-theory-after-two-year-probe) in December 2024.\n\n### **‘Gain of function’ research?**\nSome of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds.\n\nThey allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “[gain of function” research](https:\/\/www.news-medical.net\/health\/What-is-Gain-of-Function-Research.aspx#:~:text=Introduction%20to%20Gain-of-function,-Gain-of-function&text=GOF%20is%20performed%20to%20understand,and%20therapies%20to%20be%20explored.) that involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures.\n\nA 2018 [grant application](https:\/\/theintercept.com\/2021\/09\/23\/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa\/) submitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky.\n\n### **China rejects CIA report**\nOver the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility.\n\n“We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy, [Liu Pengyu, told Associated Press](https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/society\/2025\/jan\/26\/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu).\n\nThe [failure of the Chinese government](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation\/) to allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely.\n\nHowever, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research.\n\nImage Credits: [CNN](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=WlUQM8Zo-Ms&fbclid=IwAR2D8yDQUlNvQJ1C-B9tNIRgCUleejlwFvMMeUJM0V2_6NZXkjrnv_E9Bd4), [CGTN](https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=3iZkFgmYhC8), [WHO](https:\/\/healthpolicy-watch.news\/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate\/).\n\nCombat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.","meta_canonical":null}

3. Robots.txt Check

Query:

Response:

4. Spam/Ban Check

Query:

Response:

5. Seen Status Check

ℹ️ Skipped - page is already crawled

📄

INDEXABLE

✅

CRAWLED

3 days ago

🤖

ROBOTS ALLOWED

Page Info Filters

Filter	Status	Condition	Details
HTTP status	PASS	`download_http_code = 200`	HTTP 200
Age cutoff	PASS	`download_stamp > now() - 6 MONTH`	0.1 months ago
History drop	PASS	`isNull(history_drop_reason)`	No drop reason
Spam/ban	PASS	`fh_dont_index != 1 AND ml_spam_score = 0`	ml_spam_score=0
Canonical	PASS	`meta_canonical IS NULL OR = '' OR = src_unparsed`	Not set

Page Details

Property	Value
URL	https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/
Last Crawled	2026-04-14 00:28:26 (3 days ago)
First Indexed	2025-01-27 19:59:27 (1 year ago)
HTTP Status Code	200
Meta Title	CIA Report Reignites COVID-19 Origins Debate – But China’s Refusal To Share Evidence Stymies Any Conclusion - Health Policy Watch
Meta Description	The weekend release of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low
Meta Canonical	null
Boilerpipe Text	The Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021. The weekend release of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate. On the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats. Some researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally. The other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan. They argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold. SARS-CoV2 is not the same as the coronavirus in bats , although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans. Virus origins team The World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a team of independent scientists to examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021. The WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021. The origins team report in March 2021 posed four possible hypotheses about the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”. But the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i n a series of open letters to WHO . WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said candidly in July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out. “There was a premature push to refute one of the [origins] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,” said Tedros during a WHO media briefing in July 2021. China rebuffs scientific advisory group The WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the first mission to Wuhan . However, China refused SAGO’s request in July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods). “We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission. “We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said. The joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021. The CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence, according to reports . However, the CIA added that it “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”. In 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a US Congress sub-committee in December 2024. ‘Gain of function’ research? Some of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds. They allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “ gain of function” research that involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures. A 2018 grant application submitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky. China rejects CIA report Over the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility. “We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy, Liu Pengyu, told Associated Press . The failure of the Chinese government to allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely. However, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research. Image Credits: CNN , CGTN , WHO . Combat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.
Markdown	[Skip to content](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/#content) [![Health Policy Watch](https://i0.wp.com/healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/HPW-Logo-Full.png?fit=1099%2C206&ssl=1)](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/) menu - [Home](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/ "Home") - [About Us](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/about/ "About Us") [![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/themes/hpw2018/images/header-twitter.svg)](https://twitter.com/HealthPolicyW) [![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/themes/hpw2018/images/header-facebook.svg)](https://www.facebook.com/HealthPolicyWatch) - [Antimicrobial Resistance](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/anti-microbial-resistance/ "Antimicrobial Resistance") - [Infectious Diseases](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/ "Infectious Diseases") - [Pandemics & Emergencies](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/pandemics/ "Pandemics & Emergencies") - [Non-Communicable Diseases](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/noncommunicable-diseases/ "Non-Communicable Diseases") - [Health, Climate & SDGs](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/health-in-sdgs/ "Health, Climate & SDGs") [![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/themes/hpw2018/images/header-twitter.svg)](https://twitter.com/HealthPolicyW) [![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/themes/hpw2018/images/header-facebook.svg)](https://www.facebook.com/HealthPolicyWatch) CIA Report Reignites COVID-19 Origins Debate – But China’s Refusal to Share Evidence Stymies Any Conclusion [COVID-19](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/covid-19/) 27/01/2025 • [Kerry Cullinan](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/author/kerry-cullinan/ "Posts by Kerry Cullinan") ### Share this: - [Share on X (Opens in new window) X](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=twitter) - [Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=linkedin) - [Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=facebook) - [Print (Opens in new window) Print](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/#print?share=print) - [Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=bluesky) ![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-05-at-4.15.36-PM-1024x461.png) The Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021. The weekend [release](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu) of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate. On the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats. Some researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally. The other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan. They argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold. SARS-CoV2 is [not the same as the coronavirus in bats](https://bmcmedgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12920-022-01208-w#:~:text=Main%20text-,Origin%20of%20SARS-CoV-2,is%2096%25%20%5B5%5D.), although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans. ### Virus origins team The World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a [team of independent scientists](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/origins-of-the-virus) to examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021. ![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Screen-Shot-2021-01-13-at-11.10.53-PM-1024x559.png) The WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021. The origins team [report](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/sars-cov2-virus-origins-report/) in March 2021 posed [four possible hypotheses](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/sars-cov-2-origins-report-finally-released/) about the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”. But the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i[n a series of open letters to WHO](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/86225-2/). WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus [said candidly](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china/) in July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out. “There was a premature push to refute one of the \[origins\] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,” [said Tedros](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china/) during a WHO media briefing in July 2021. ### China rebuffs scientific advisory group The WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the [first mission to Wuhan](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-plays-down-china-origins-research-expectations/). However, [China refused SAGO’s request](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation/) in July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods). “We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission. “We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said. ![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-09-at-11.59.08-AM-1024x524.png) The joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021. The CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence, [according to reports](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu). However, the CIA added that it “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”. In 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a [US Congress sub-committee](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/12/3/us-lawmakers-back-covid-lab-leak-theory-after-two-year-probe) in December 2024. ### ‘Gain of function’ research? Some of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds. They allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “[gain of function” research](https://www.news-medical.net/health/What-is-Gain-of-Function-Research.aspx#:~:text=Introduction%20to%20Gain-of-function,-Gain-of-function&text=GOF%20is%20performed%20to%20understand,and%20therapies%20to%20be%20explored.) that involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures. A 2018 [grant application](https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/) submitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky. ### China rejects CIA report Over the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility. “We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy, [Liu Pengyu, told Associated Press](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu). The [failure of the Chinese government](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation/) to allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely. However, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research. Image Credits: [CNN](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlUQM8Zo-Ms&fbclid=IwAR2D8yDQUlNvQJ1C-B9tNIRgCUleejlwFvMMeUJM0V2_6NZXkjrnv_E9Bd4), [CGTN](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iZkFgmYhC8), [WHO](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/). ### Share this: - [Share on X (Opens in new window) X](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=twitter) - [Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=linkedin) - [Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=facebook) - [Print (Opens in new window) Print](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/#print?share=print) - [Share on Bluesky (Opens in new window) Bluesky](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/?share=bluesky) Combat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here. Posted in [Content type](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/content-type/), [COVID-19](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/covid-19/), [COVID-19 Science](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/covid-19-science/), [Infectious Diseases](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/), [News](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/content-type/news/), [SARS-CoV2 Origins](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/infectious-disease/covid-19-science/sars-cov2-origins/) Related [WHO Expert Group: Step up Typhoid Vaccination in High Risk Regions, Fewer Polio Doses in Low-Risk Areas](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-expert-group-advises-on-typhoid-covid-19-and-polio-vaccinations/) [Medicines & Vaccines](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/drug-and-diagnostics-development/medicines-and-vaccines/) 18/03/2026 * [A Flag Recaptured: US Exit from WHO Highlights Anger Over COVID-19 Pandemic](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/a-flag-recaptured-us-exit-from-who-highlights-anger-over-covid-19-pandemic/) [World Health Organization](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/institutions/world-health-organization/) 27/01/2026 * [Most Vaccine Hesitancy can be Successfully Overcome, New Lancet Study Finds](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/vaccine-hesitancy-temporary-for-majority/) [Pandemic Preparedness](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/pandemics/preparedness/) 14/01/2026 * Do you really care about access and equity in global health? Your contributions are urgently needed to support our mission in open access global health journalism and our network of correspondents in Africa, Asia, New York and Geneva. Their reporting connects the dots between the regional realities and the big global debates. Every contribution - big or small - helps us sustain our reporting for the benefit of all. Related [WHO Expert Group: Step up Typhoid Vaccination in High Risk Regions, Fewer Polio Doses in Low-Risk Areas](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-expert-group-advises-on-typhoid-covid-19-and-polio-vaccinations/) [Medicines & Vaccines](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/drug-and-diagnostics-development/medicines-and-vaccines/) 18/03/2026 * [A Flag Recaptured: US Exit from WHO Highlights Anger Over COVID-19 Pandemic](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/a-flag-recaptured-us-exit-from-who-highlights-anger-over-covid-19-pandemic/) [World Health Organization](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/institutions/world-health-organization/) 27/01/2026 * [Most Vaccine Hesitancy can be Successfully Overcome, New Lancet Study Finds](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/vaccine-hesitancy-temporary-for-majority/) [Pandemic Preparedness](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/category/pandemics/preparedness/) 14/01/2026 * Do you really care about access and equity in global health? Your contributions are urgently needed to support our mission in open access global health journalism and our network of correspondents in Africa, Asia, New York and Geneva. Their reporting connects the dots between the regional realities and the big global debates. Every contribution - big or small - helps us sustain our reporting for the benefit of all. This site uses cookies to help give you the best experience on our website. Cookies enable us to collect information that helps us personalise your experience and improve the functionality and performance of our site. By continuing to read our website, we assume you agree to this, otherwise you can adjust your browser settings. Please read our cookie and Privacy Policy. [Our Cookies and Privacy Policy](http://healthpolicy-watch.org/privacy-policy/) Sign up for free news alerts Signup Link Contact Us info@healthpolicy-watch.org 1-5 Route des Morillions CP 2100 Geneva 1211, Switzerland \+41 22 791 67 28 [About](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/about/) [Privacy Policy](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/privacy-policy/) [Archives](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/archive/) Staff Access [Log in](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-login.php) [Entries RSS](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/post-feeds) [Comments RSS](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/comments-page) [Wordpress.org](https://wordpress.org/) Supported by Sponsors [![Wellcome](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Wellcome_logo_Black.jpg)](https://wellcome.org/) [![CeHDI](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2025/11/CeHDI_Logo.jpg)](https://www.cehdi.org/) [![Geneva](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/geneva.png)](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/about/) [![Loro](https://www.loro.ch/themes/logo.svg)](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/about/) Copyright c 2020 Global Policy Reporting ## ## Loading Comments... You must be [logged in](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/) to post a comment. ###
Readable Markdown	![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-05-at-4.15.36-PM-1024x461.png) The Wuhan Institute of Virology, guarded by police officers during the visit of the WHO team in January 2021. The weekend [release](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu) of the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) report favouring a laboratory leak as the likely origin of COVID-19 – albeit with “low confidence” – has reignited a vitriolic debate. On the one side of the divide are those who argue that SARS-CoV2, the virus causing COVID-19, originated from a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that was studying coronaviruses in bats. Some researchers who favour the lab-leak thesis argue that the virus contains unusual features that indicate it may have been genetically modified by humans. These focus on the virus’s furin cleavage site, a strange feature on the spike protein of the virus that is not present in other coronaviruses, that cast doubt on whether the virus had evolved naturally. The other camp (the zoonosis thesis) believes the virus was transmitted from bats to humans via an animal source – Animal X – that has never been conclusively identified but is believed to have been in the Huanan wet market in Wuhan. They argue that early COVID-19 cases centred around the market and environmental swabs that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 clustered in the corner of the market where animals were sold. SARS-CoV2 is [not the same as the coronavirus in bats](https://bmcmedgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12920-022-01208-w#:~:text=Main%20text-,Origin%20of%20SARS-CoV-2,is%2096%25%20%5B5%5D.), although there is one that is 96% similar. It would have needed to have mutated in “Animal X” in order to infect humans. ### Virus origins team The World Health Organization (WHO) assembled a [team of independent scientists](https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/origins-of-the-virus) to examine the origin of the pandemic in 2020, but the Chinese government denied it access to the data it requested on a visit to Wuhan in January 2021. ![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Screen-Shot-2021-01-13-at-11.10.53-PM-1024x559.png) The WHO team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic arriving at the Wuhan Tianhe International Airport in January 2021. The origins team [report](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/sars-cov2-virus-origins-report/) in March 2021 posed [four possible hypotheses](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/sars-cov-2-origins-report-finally-released/) about the virus’ origin, but concluded that zoonotic transmission was the most plausible, describing a lab leak as “extremely unlikely”. But the failure of the WHO-convened team to carefully consider the possibility that a biosafety accident caused the pandemic was heavily criticised by a group of international experts, i[n a series of open letters to WHO](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/86225-2/). WHO Director-General Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus [said candidly](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china/) in July 2021 that China’s failure to share data meant that a lab accident could not be ruled out. “There was a premature push to refute one of the \[origins\] options, the laboratory theory. I was a lab technician myself, an immunologist, and have worked in the lab and lab accidents happen,” [said Tedros](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china/) during a WHO media briefing in July 2021. ### China rebuffs scientific advisory group The WHO then established an international Scientific Advisory Group on Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) to replace the group that led the [first mission to Wuhan](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/who-plays-down-china-origins-research-expectations/). However, [China refused SAGO’s request](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation/) in July 2021 to review more data on Wuhan’s sensitive coronavirus research laboratories, and the wild animal species on sale in 2019 at the city’s live animal markets. (China favoured the thesis that the virus came from imported frozen goods). “We will not accept such an origin-tracing plan as it, in some aspects, disregards common sense and defies science,” said Zeng Yixin, Vice Minister of the National Health Commission. “We hope the WHO would seriously review the considerations and suggestions made by Chinese experts and truly treat the origin tracing of the COVID-19 virus as a scientific matter, and get rid of political interference,” Zeng said. ![](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Screen-Shot-2021-02-09-at-11.59.08-AM-1024x524.png) The joint WHO-Chinese experts investigating the emergence of SARS-CoV2 in Wuhan at a media briefing on 9 February 2021. The CIA’s report, initiated during the Biden Administration but released by Donald Trump’s pick for CIA head, John Ratcliffe, was not the result of any new evidence but rather a re-examination of available evidence, [according to reports](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu). However, the CIA added that it “continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the Covid-19 pandemic remain plausible”. In 2023, the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) said it favoured the lab leak theory as did a [US Congress sub-committee](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/12/3/us-lawmakers-back-covid-lab-leak-theory-after-two-year-probe) in December 2024. ### ‘Gain of function’ research? Some of those who favour the lab leak thesis have claimed that there was a cover-up of the lab leak theory because a US research group, EcoHealth Alliance, had been involved with the WIV and received government research funds. They allege that the WIV, assisted by EcoHealth, engaged in “[gain of function” research](https://www.news-medical.net/health/What-is-Gain-of-Function-Research.aspx#:~:text=Introduction%20to%20Gain-of-function,-Gain-of-function&text=GOF%20is%20performed%20to%20understand,and%20therapies%20to%20be%20explored.) that involved manipulating coronaviruses to see how they responded to environmental pressures. A 2018 [grant application](https://theintercept.com/2021/09/23/coronavirus-research-grant-darpa/) submitted by EcoHealth to the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) shows the group wanted to conduct gain-of-function research that included inserting novel cleavage sites into coronaviruses in their lab. This was denied as it was deemed it too risky. ### China rejects CIA report Over the weekend, Chinese authorities dismissed the CIA report as being unhelpful and motivated by politics. On Saturday, a spokesperson for China’s US embassy said the CIA report has no credibility. “We firmly oppose the politicisation and stigmatisation of the source of the virus, and once again call on everyone to respect science and stay away from conspiracy theories,” a spokesperson from China’s US embassy, [Liu Pengyu, told Associated Press](https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/jan/26/cia-now-backs-lab-leak-theory-to-explain-origins-of-covid-19?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky&CMP=bsky_gu). The [failure of the Chinese government](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/china-rejects-who-plan-for-next-phase-of-covid-origins-investigation/) to allow independent scientists access to Wuhan, COVID-19’s “ground zero”, and various data sets, means that conclusive evidence to support one or other thesis is unlikely. However, the politicisation of the quest to find the origins of SARS CoV2 has also polarised research and contaminated research. Image Credits: [CNN](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlUQM8Zo-Ms&fbclid=IwAR2D8yDQUlNvQJ1C-B9tNIRgCUleejlwFvMMeUJM0V2_6NZXkjrnv_E9Bd4), [CGTN](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iZkFgmYhC8), [WHO](https://healthpolicy-watch.news/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/). Combat the infodemic in health information and support health policy reporting from the global South. Our growing network of journalists in Africa, Asia, Geneva and New York connect the dots between regional realities and the big global debates, with evidence-based, open access news and analysis. To make a personal or organisational contribution click here.
Shard	68 (laksa)
Root Hash	2346392570040768268
Unparsed URL	news,healthpolicy-watch!/cia-report-reignites-covid-19-origins-debate/ s443