“With the report delivered, the work is finished,” Price said.
Trump issued a statement on Tuesday boasting of his early insistence that the Wuhan laboratory was the source of the virus. “For me, it was clear from the start,” he said. “But I was subjected to severe criticism as usual.”
Although there is no new evidence, a number of scientists have recently begun to speak out about the need to remain open to the possibility of the virus accidentally emerging from the laboratory, possibly after it has been collected in nature, a laboratory origin that differs from creation. By scholars.
“It is likely that this is a naturally occurring virus, but we cannot rule out the possibility of some kind of laboratory accident,” Dr. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, told senators on Wednesday.
Some scientists attributed this shift in part to the fact that more extreme proponents of the laboratory leak hypothesis, such as Mr. Navarro, have been engulfed in more nuanced discussions of how lab workers accidentally transferred the virus abroad.
Mark Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at Harvard University, said the scientists were reluctant to discuss the hypothesis of the lab leak last year because they were on guard against the disinformation.
“Nobody wants to submit to conspiracy theories,” he said.
But the March report issued by a group of experts selected by the World Health Organization in cooperation with Chinese scientists, which rejected the possibility of a leak in the laboratory and described it as “very unlikely”, forced some scientists to speak out.
“When I read it, I was very frustrated,” said Akiko Iwasaki, an immunologist at Yale University. Together with Professor Lipsitch, she signed on A dissertation published in the journal Science This month he says there isn’t enough evidence to determine whether a natural origin or accidental laboratory leak caused the coronavirus pandemic.