On 30 December 2019, the Program for
Monitoring Emerging Diseases notified the world about a
pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, China (1).
Since then, scientists have made remarkable progress in
understanding the causative agent, severe acute
respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), its
transmission, pathogenesis, and mitigation by vaccines,
therapeutics, and non-pharmaceutical interventions. Yet
more investigation is still needed to determine the
origin of the pandemic. Theories of accidental release
from a lab and zoonotic spillover both remain viable.
Knowing how COVID-19 emerged is critical for informing
global strategies to mitigate the risk of future
outbreaks.
In May 2020, the World Health Assembly
requested that the World Health Organization (WHO)
director-general work closely with partners to determine
the origins of SARS-CoV-2 (2).
In November, the Terms of Reference for a China–WHO
joint study were released (3).
The information, data, and samples for the study's first
phase were collected and summarized by the Chinese half
of the team; the rest of the team built on this
analysis. Although there were no findings in clear
support of either a natural spillover or a lab accident,
the team assessed a zoonotic spillover from an
intermediate host as “likely to very likely,” and a
laboratory incident as “extremely unlikely” [(4),
p. 9]. Furthermore, the two theories were not given
balanced consideration. Only 4 of the 313 pages of the
report and its annexes addressed the possibility of a
laboratory accident (4).
Notably, WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus
commented that the report's consideration of evidence
supporting a laboratory accident was insufficient and
offered to provide additional resources to fully
evaluate the possibility (5).
As scientists with relevant expertise, we
agree with the WHO director-general (5),
the United States and 13 other countries (6),
and the European Union (7)
that greater clarity about the origins of this pandemic
is necessary and feasible to achieve. We must take
hypotheses about both natural and laboratory spillovers
seriously until we have sufficient data. A proper
investigation should be transparent, objective,
data-driven, inclusive of broad expertise, subject to
independent oversight, and responsibly managed to
minimize the impact of conflicts of interest. Public
health agencies and research laboratories alike need to
open their records to the public. Investigators should
document the veracity and provenance of data from which
analyses are conducted and conclusions drawn, so that
analyses are reproducible by independent experts.
Finally, in this time of unfortunate
anti-Asian sentiment in some countries, we note that at
the beginning of the pandemic, it was Chinese doctors,
scientists, journalists, and citizens who shared with
the world crucial information about the spread of the
virus—often at great personal cost (8,
9).
We should show the same determination in promoting a
dispassionate science-based discourse on this difficult
but important issue.