A team of scientists say it is "beyond reasonable doubt" the Covid pandemic started with infected animals.

A team of scientists say it is “beyond reasonable doubt” the Covid pandemic started with infected animals sold at a market, rather than a laboratory leak.

They were analysing hundreds of samples collected from Wuhan, China, in January 2020.

The results identify a shortlist of animals – including racoon dogs, civets and bamboo rats – as potential sources of the pandemic.

Despite even highlighting one market stall as a hotspot of both animals and coronavirus, the study cannot provide definitive proof.

The samples were collected by Chinese officials in the early stages of Covid and are one of the most scientifically valuable sources of information on the origins of the pandemic.

…

Their analysis was published last year and the raw data made available to other scientists. Now a team in the US and France says they have performed even more advanced genetic analyses to peer deeper into Covid’s early days.

    • peopleproblems
      6•2 months ago

      I think they determined that the virus that spread to humans was bats that transferred to something in the market (aka intermediate hosts). That virus would have spread there, while technically the bats could have infected humans.

    • @Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      -5•2 months ago

      Wuhan market didn’t sell bats.

      Also, the only bats with a (96%) similar covid strain were in caves 1000 miles away.

      However, samples from those bats were stored at the wuhan institute of virology.

      • Flying Squid
        10•2 months ago

        Very first sentence quoted above. You don’t even have to go to the article:

        A team of scientists say it is “beyond reasonable doubt” the Covid pandemic started with infected animals sold at a market, rather than a laboratory leak.

        No amount of evidence or scientific consensus can convince a conspiracy theorist…

        And yes, I know:

        Despite even highlighting one market stall as a hotspot of both animals and coronavirus, the study cannot provide definitive proof.

        Therefore lab leak, right?

        • Roflmasterbigpimp
          2•2 months ago

          The samples were collected by Chinese officials in the early stages of Covid and are one of the most scientifically valuable sources of information on the origins of the pandemic.

          This Part makes me question things a bit. China is not really known for being honest about things happening in China.

          • Flying Squid
            10•2 months ago

            Questioning things is fine. On the other hand, it’s pretty hard to fake the ability to trace DNA to a specific market stall.

            On top of that, the person I replied to is not questioning. They’ve already decided it’s definitely a lab leak. See all of their other comments.

          • @Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
            6•2 months ago

            The study itself is quite balanced and honest about data collection. It doesn’t rule out a lab origin like the article claims.

            our study does not rule out human-to-animal transmission, as the sampling was carried out after the human infection within the market. Thus, the possibility of potential introduction of the virus to the market through infected humans, or cold-chain products, cannot yet be ruled out.