These two new simultaneous studies are making the headlines! I have a hunch that these two studies are more pseudoscience and/or speculation than science! Caveat: I did not have time to read both studies
To the best of my knowledge, the Communist Party of China has not exactly fully cooperated on finding the cause of the global Covid-19 pandemic. Thus, any outside/external studies are wrought with doubts!
The funny thing is that there have been probably 10 or more seafood markets in other big cities around China that are probably similar to the one in Wuhan. Or was the Wuhan market unique in China in that it also sold wild animals besides seafood? I don't remember anyone making this argument. The scientists of the two new studies are also oblivious to the question about other, similar wet markets in China.
However, Wuhan is most likely the only city in China with a namesake and now infamous Institute of Virology!
Interestingly, Study2 admits in the abstract "our analyses indicate that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 occurred via the live wildlife trade in China" as if confirming there have been other such live wildlife markets in China.
Using data from the Communist Party of China is highly dubious!
"... The first study, using data from Chinese scientists, mapped the 150 earliest cases in Wuhan from December 2019 and found the greatest density of cases was near the market, the AP reports. Market workers appear to have spread the virus in the local community.
The cluster of early cases and community spread near the market make “an insane bull’s eye,” [???] said University of Arizona evolutionary virologist and first author of the study Michael Worobey. ..."
"Reality check: “Have we disproven the lab leak theory? No, we have not,” said Kristian Andersen, a Scripps Research professor and coauthor of the first study."
Study1 seems to suggest there were two separate incidents of infection thus implicitly ruling out a singular lab leak. What if there were two leaks or one leak and one spreader event etc.
From the abstract (Study1):
"Understanding the circumstances that lead to pandemics is important for their prevention. Here, we analyze the genomic diversity of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) early in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We show that SARS-CoV-2 genomic diversity before February 2020 likely comprised only two distinct viral lineages, denoted A and B. Phylodynamic rooting methods, coupled with epidemic simulations, reveal that these lineages were the result of at least two separate cross-species transmission events into humans. The first zoonotic transmission likely involved lineage B viruses around 18 November 2019 (23 October–8 December), while the separate introduction of lineage A likely occurred within weeks of this event. These findings indicate that it is unlikely that SARS-CoV-2 circulated widely in humans prior to November 2019 and define the narrow window between when SARS-CoV-2 first jumped into humans and when the first cases of COVID-19 were reported. As with other coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 emergence likely resulted from multiple zoonotic events."
From the abstract (Study2):
"Understanding how severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in 2019 is critical to preventing zoonotic outbreaks before they become the next pandemic. The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China, was identified as a likely source of cases in early reports but later this conclusion became controversial. We show the earliest known COVID-19 cases from December 2019, including those without reported direct links, were geographically centered on this market. We report that live SARS-CoV-2 susceptible mammals were sold at the market in late 2019 and, within the market, SARS-CoV-2-positive environmental samples were spatially associated with vendors selling live mammals. While there is insufficient evidence to define upstream events, and exact circumstances remain obscure, our analyses indicate that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 occurred via the live wildlife trade in China, and show that the Huanan market was the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic."
Other notable excerpts from the two studies:
- "... Despite limited testing of live wildlife sold at the market ..." (Study2)
- "... we report that multiple plausible intermediate wildlife hosts of SARS-CoV-2 progenitor viruses" This is not much better than speculation! (Study2)
- "... There was an extensive network of wildlife farms in western Hubei province, including hundreds of thousands of raccoon dogs on farms in Enshi prefecture, which supplied the Huanan market (48). This region of Hubei contains extensive cave complexes housing Rhinolophus bats, which carry SARSr-CoVs (49). SARS-CoV-1 was recovered from farmed masked palm civets from Hubei in 2003 and 2004 (20). The animals on these farms (nearly 1 million) were rapidly released, sold, or killed in early 2020 (48), apparently without testing for SARS-CoV-2 (7). Live animals sold at the market (Table 1) were apparently not sampled either." (Study2)
- "Limitations ... Importantly, we lack direct evidence of a virus closely related to SARS-CoV-2 in non-human mammals at the Huanan market or its supply chain. ..." (Study1)
- "... The genomic diversity of SARS-CoV-2 during the early pandemic presents a paradox. Lineage A viruses are at least two mutations closer to bat coronaviruses, indicating that the ancestor of SARS-CoV-2 arose from this lineage. However, lineage B viruses predominated early in the pandemic, particularly at the Huanan market, indicating that this lineage began spreading earlier in humans. Further complicating this matter is the molecular clock of SARS-CoV-2 in humans, which rejects a single-introduction origin of the pandemic from a lineage A virus. ..." (Study1)
- "... indicates that the two zoonotic events establishing lineages A and B may have been accompanied by additional, cryptic introductions. ..." (Study1)
- "Sequence data We queried the GISAID database (57), GenBank, and National Genomics Data Center of the China National Center for Bioinformatics (CNCB), for complete high-coverage SARS-CoV-2 genomes collected by 14 February 2020, resulting in a dataset of 787 taxa belonging to lineages A and B and 20 taxa with C/C or T/T haplotypes." (Study1) Authors don't seem to provide an easily accessible breakdown of the sources for the 787 taxa.
Scientists confirm COVID tied to wildlife sales at Chinese market The research, co-authored by UCLA’s Marc Suchard, indicates the pandemic started with two separate jumps from animals to humans
The molecular epidemiology of multiple zoonotic origins of SARS-CoV-2 (open access; Study1)
No comments:
Post a Comment