Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2025
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Research . 2025
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Research . 2025
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

The USA was involved in the creation of SARS-CoV-2

The virus or a close precursor as a bat vaccine was likely created in a lab in the USA with oversight by the US Government. A sample that was intended for the WIV BSL4 lab may have been sent to the WIV BSL2 lab. And other options
Authors: Colignatus, Thomas;

The USA was involved in the creation of SARS-CoV-2

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic of 2020–2023(+) caused an estimated 17-30 million deaths, yet the origin of SARS-CoV-2 remains officially undetermined. The Lancet commission Sachs et al. (2022) highlighted the need for accountability but is not listened to by WHO SAGO (2025). Sachs mentions the collaboration by US labs with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), and deduces a likely lab origin in the USA and leak at WIV. Possibly a sample that was intended for testing by the WIV BSL4 lab was sent erroneously to the WIV BSL2 lab. Haslam (2024) infers that it was a bat vaccine (perhaps mutating towards humans). Some suggest rogue biowarfare by unsupervised agents in the first Trump administration during his clash with China. Colignatus (2025) about the current world crisis shows the need to strengthen the United Nations given the geopolitical risk of disorder and warring regional hegemons. President Trump’s rhetoric about “the China virus” is toxic to society. (Economic) Scientists can help defuse the virus controversy. This requires much more transparancy than exists now. In early February 2020, a small group of leading virologists—convened by Jeremy Farrar with Francis Collins (NIH) and Anthony Fauci (NIAID)—discussed whether the virus could have been engineered. Releases under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) show that some researchers initially considered a laboratory origin likely. Within days, however, drafts were reframed to emphasize a zoonotic pathway. “The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2” (Nature Medicine, March 2020), henceforth POS2, is a Correspondence (point of view) and no full Article. It concluded categorically that the virus “is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.” This conclusion shaped the global narrative, though its generality is problematic. SAGO (2025) indeed rejects that generality but still suffers from the earlier narrative by not studying US labs. Reviewed is here how POS2 was produced, mapping the network of actors (including Andersen, Holmes, Rambaut, Drosten, Fouchier and Koopmans) and listing their institutional ties and narratives. The authors focused on the WIV without considering potential involvement of US laboratories, and they looked at genomic structure rather than examining laboratory practices. They held ex cathedra that a lab would create perfection and nature not. Scientific integrity requires a correction or retraction of POS2 and a revamped re-examination of the origin of the virus, see Sachs et al. (2022) and Haslam (2024).

Related Organizations
Keywords

JEL: A12, F5, H11, H56, I18, O19, P00; MESH: 92D30 (Epidemiology), 92C60 (Medical epidemiology), 91B64 (Macroeconomic theory), 91B76 (Environmental economics), 00-01 (Introductory exposition); Other: SARS-CoV-2, Public Health, SARS-CoV-2 origins, COVID-19 pandemic, laboratory origin, zoonotic origin, The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2, Nature Medicine (2020), Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), Jeremy Farrar, Anthony Fauci, Jeffrey Sachs, EcoHealth Alliance (EHA), Project DEFUSE, Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric, Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), World Health Organization (WHO), SAGO report (2025), scientific integrity, retraction, conflicts of interest in science, gain-of-function research, United Nations governance, global health, planetary health policy, public trust in science, 2025 world crisis, geopolitics, rogue biowarfare, international rule based order, Jan Tinbergen, the optimal economic order

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average
Related to Research communities