The World Health Organization (WHO) Refutes Claims that it Abandoned its Investigation into the Origins of COVID-19 due to China’s Uncooperativeness

The World Health Organization (WHO) Refutes Claims that it Abandoned its Investigation into the Origins of COVID-19 due to China’s Uncooperativeness.

The World Health Organization has denied a report published by Nature claiming that it had abandoned an investigation into the origins of the coronavirus. This denial, however, has highlighted the challenges of conducting such an investigation, particularly due to China’s reluctance to provide access to sites that could contain information about the virus’s origins.

The report published by Nature suggested that there would be no follow-up to the WHO’s spring 2021 report on the origins of the pandemic due to China’s unwillingness to allow crucial studies. According to WHO infectious disease expert Maria Van Kerkhove, who leads the agency’s pandemic response, there is no “phase two” of the investigation.

Despite this, WHO officials were quick to refute the claims made by the report, stating that it was entirely false. The controversy highlights the limited knowledge that exists surrounding the origin of the virus, a world-changing event that remains a mystery three years after it first emerged. The question of whether the pathogen originated in a market stall or on a laboratory table remains unresolved due to China’s unwillingness to allow Western researchers access to relevant sites.

Van Kerkhove expressed her frustration with the difficulties in re-establishing trust with Chinese counterparts, who have grown increasingly skeptical of outside investigators over the course of the pandemic. This lack of access has made it challenging to find answers to questions surrounding the origin of the virus.

A new Republican majority in the House of Representatives has pledged to question Dr. Anthony Fauci, the recently retired immunologist, and other top officials about their knowledge of and potential oversights in risky research that some believe may have led to the pandemic’s origin.

The National Institutes of Health were criticized by the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services last month for insufficient oversight of U.S. funds supporting research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through an intermediary organization, the EcoHealth Alliance in New York. EcoHealth Alliance head Peter Daszak, who was among the most vocal critics of the lab-leak theory, also served on the WHO team that investigated Wuhan in early 2021.

WHO spokesperson Jašarević stated this week that while there would not be a “phase two” of the original coronavirus investigation, the Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) panel would continue searching for answers on how the pandemic began.

However, Jašarević acknowledged that obstacles remain, writing that “China must provide access and information for this to happen — and if this doesn’t happen, efforts to understand the origins will remain rather stymied.”

Nature suggested that these difficulties were partly due to former President Donald Trump’s “unsubstantiated claims” that the virus originated in a Chinese laboratory, which were initially criticized as xenophobic and conspiratorial. Nevertheless, the so-called lab-leak hypothesis has gained credibility as experts have gradually acknowledged its plausibility, although the scientific consensus still favors zoonosis as the most likely explanation.

Van Kerkhove expressed frustration with the politics surrounding the pandemic’s origins in her interview with Nature, stating that “the politics across the world of this really hampered progress on understanding the origins.”

According to experts cited in an article, the West has been accused of defaming China and propagating conspiracy theories. Virologist Angela Rasmussen, who was quoted in the piece, expressed her thoughts on Twitter, suggesting that demonizing and ostracizing Chinese colleagues has resulted in the failure of any meaningful further investigation into the origins of the coronavirus.

The first phase of the WHO’s investigation involved the only authorized visit by Western researchers to Wuhan, the suspected birthplace of the pandemic. However, the resulting report was criticized for not giving enough attention to the possibility that the virus had originated in a laboratory due to “gain of function” research that enhances pathogens to study how they evolve in nature.

WHO Director Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus later stated that it was “premature” to rule out the lab-leak hypothesis. Tuesday’s article in Nature appeared to be a defeat for the WHO, which has been under fire for failing to push China to disclose more information about its Wuhan research.

Richard Ebright, a microbiologist at Rutgers, criticized the WHO’s initial investigation, calling it “a failed simulacrum of an investigation,” and accused the organization of failing to fulfill its responsibility to the global public.

On Wednesday, Van Kerkhove gave a more forceful rebuttal to the Nature article. During a press briefing, she claimed that the article was an “error in reporting” and misinterpreted her words. She clarified that “Phase 2 became SAGO,” and said that they are doing their best to move forward with their investigation. Van Kerkhove stated that they will continue to push China for more collaboration and access, even though the investigation is becoming increasingly difficult due to the time that has elapsed since the first cases of the coronavirus were recorded.

However, Nature has stood by their article and is in discussion with the World Health Organization regarding their concerns. Lisa Boucher, the communications director of Nature, stated that they take accuracy seriously and uphold the highest standards in journalism.

The conflicting reports have left many skeptics confused about who is calling the shots and why. Mathematical biologist Alex Washburne expressed concern about China’s reluctance to open its laboratories to Western inspectors, suggesting it may be a sign of a cover-up. He also questioned why China has not ruled out its own labs’ involvement if the virus did not originate there.

Washburne was also troubled by WHO’s appointment of Jeremy Farrar as its chief scientist. Farrar had been a signatory to a letter published in the Lancet that condemned the idea that COVID-19 could have come from a laboratory.