We may never know for sure how COVID-19 began, WHO says
That was the unsatisfying conclusion from an expert group charged by the World Health Organization (WHO) to investigate the pandemic's origins in its final report.
Marietjie Venter, the group's chair, said at a press briefing that most scientific data supports the hypothesis that the new coronavirus jumped to humans from animals.
That was also the conclusion drawn by the first WHO expert group that investigated the pandemic's origins in 2021, when scientists concluded the virus likely spread from bats to humans, via another intermediary animal.
At the time, WHO said a lab leak was 'extremely unlikely'.
Venter said that after more than three years of work, WHO's expert group was unable to get the necessary data to evaluate whether or not COVID-19 was the result of a lab accident, despite repeated requests for hundreds of genetic sequences and more detailed biosecurity information that were made to the Chinese government.
'Therefore, this hypothesis could not be investigated or excluded,' she said. 'It was deemed to be very speculative, based on political opinions and not backed up by science'.
She said that the 27-member group did not reach a consensus; one member resigned earlier this week and three others asked for their names to be removed from the report.
Venter said there was no evidence to prove that COVID-19 had been manipulated in a lab, nor was there any indication that the virus had been spreading before December 2019 anywhere outside of China.
'Until more scientific data becomes available, the origins of how SARS-CoV-2 entered human populations will remain inconclusive,' Venter said, referring to the scientific name for the COVID-19 virus.
WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said it was a 'moral imperative' to determine how COVID began, noting that the virus killed at least 20 million people, wiped at least $10 trillion (€8.8 trillion) from the global economy and upended the lives of billions of people.
Last year, the AP found that the Chinese government froze meaningful domestic and international efforts to trace the virus' origins in the first weeks of the outbreak in 2020 and that WHO itself may have missed early opportunities to investigate how COVID-19 began.
US President Donald Trump has long blamed the emergence of the coronavirus on a laboratory accident in China, while a US intelligence analysis found there was insufficient evidence to prove the theory.
Chinese officials have repeatedly dismissed the idea that the pandemic could have started in a lab, saying that the search for its origins should be conducted in other countries.
Last September, researchers zeroed in on a short list of animals they think might have spread COVID-19 to humans, including racoon dogs, civet cats, and bamboo rats.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Euronews
9 hours ago
- Euronews
Rich countries pay more for medicines, but cost burden is far lower
Wealthy countries may pay steep prices for medicines, but once their purchasing power is factored in, they actually benefit from some of the lowest costs in the world, a new study has found. The analysis of 549 essential medicines across 72 markets worldwide reveals major disparities in affordability between wealthier and poorer countries – even though rich countries often pay higher list prices. While poorer nations often have lower list prices, people in those countries tend to shoulder a far greater financial burden, according to the study, which was published in the journal JAMA Health Forum. In parts of Africa and Southeast Asia, critical medicines can cost the lowest-income earners several weeks' worth of wages if they have to pay out of pocket. The 549 drugs included in the study were sourced from the World Health Organization's (WHO) essential medicines list, which tallies the most important medicines for health systems to function. They include everything from over-the-counter painkillers to antibiotics, anaesthetics, and mental health drugs. No country stocked every drug, with availability ranging from 438 medicines in Germany to 225 in Kuwait. Across the 33 European countries included in the study, the average was 367 medicines. The study found that treatments for mental and behavioural disorders and cardiovascular disease tended to be the most expensive, while drugs for hepatitis B and C were generally the cheapest. European countries spent the most on essential medicines – $2 billion (€1.74 billion) overall and $192 (€167) per capita. At the other end of the spectrum, the Americas spent $1 billion (€868 million) overall and Southeast Asia spent $7 (€6) per capita in 2022. However, a medicine's list price – the sticker price set by a drugmaker before any discounts, subsidies, or insurance are taken into account – can be misleading. Cost of living and the government's role in setting drug prices vary around the world. To better reflect affordability, researchers used Germany as a benchmark and adjusted prices for local purchasing power. They found that medicine prices in Lebanon were roughly one-fifth of German prices, while in Argentina, prices were nearly six times as high as in Germany. In Pakistan, for example, drug prices may be lower on paper, but once purchasing power is factored in, they're about the same as in Germany. And in the United States, prices reached three times the German level. Meanwhile in India, minimum-wage earners would need about 10 days of work to afford a monthlong dose of tenofovir disoproxil, which treats chronic hepatitis B and helps prevent and treat HIV/AIDS. For the chemotherapy drug paclitaxel, minimum-wage labourers in lower-income countries would need to work for nearly six weeks to pay for a monthlong course of the treatment. 'Some poorer countries face a higher burden of medication costs, even if the price for the same medicine is lower compared to richer countries,' the researchers said.
LeMonde
18 hours ago
- LeMonde
The Greek public healthcare system remains in shambles
In 2011, Giorgos Vichas, a cardiologist, opened a community clinic with six colleagues in Ellinikon, a southern suburb of Athens, to meet the needs of thousands of long-term unemployed people who, lacking health insurance, were no longer admitted free of charge to public hospitals. In 2015, when the left-wing Syriza government passed legislation allowing uninsured people back into public hospitals, the Ellinikon clinic became less essential. But public facilities quickly ran into trouble. "For the long-term unemployed, that reform was progress. But the problem is that the funding provided by the government to cover the care for these additional patients is not enough. As a result, hospitals are in debt and lack everything...," the cardiologist pointed out. So much so that, even after 2015, regular patients continued to visit the Ellinikon clinic because "they still felt stigmatized at public hospitals, they still didn't have access to certain medications that were too expensive, and waiting times for care were still long," Vichas recalled. But the community clinic did not last. It had to close in March 2020, at the start of the Covid-19 crisis, to make way for a luxury development with skyscrapers, residences, a shopping center, hotels and even a casino.
Fashion Network
2 days ago
- Fashion Network
Is anybody fighting back in this trade war?
By no means does the firm anticipate zero harm. Business confidence is down but not collapsing. Capital spending will be constrained. And while chances of recession are still high, a better outcome remains very plausible. This sort of guarded optimism — or qualified pessimism — is a break from the dark warnings. Christine Lagarde, head of the European Central Bank, told leaders to prepare for a worst-case scenario in which an antagonistic US drags the world into destructive economic conflict. The prime minister of Singapore, a city-state that thrived during the heyday of free trade, couldn't hide his dismay: Tariffs aren't the actions of friends, Lawrence Wong noted. His Canadian counterpart, Mark Carney, declared that relations with the US would be changed forever. Chinese President Xi Jinping has studiously matched American moves but also toned down his rhetoric and actions when appropriate. Washington and Beijing this week extended a pause on higher tariffs for 90 days, the latest in a series of suspensions. India, which has been the subject of some bullish projections as China's economy has slowed, is one of the few economies of significance that hasn't cut a deal with Trump. But Prime Minister Narendra Modi also hasn't gone measure for measure or shown a desire to get even with American businesses. Yes, there has been indignity and hurt feelings. The governor of the Reserve Bank of India dismissed Trump's claim that commerce was dead there. He touted India's contribution to global growth — about 18% compared to around 11% for the US — and insisted the local economy was doing well. This is in the ballpark, based on IMF projections. It also misses the point that in pure size, America dwarfs India. Brazil, a comer that struggles to make good on its potential, is also refusing to bend. President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva loathes dependence on the US and wants to be treated as an equal. But Trump doesn't like a court case against Lula's predecessor for allegedly plotting a coup. Brazil is trying to develop an alternative to the dollar and places great store in commercial ties to the BRICS group of emerging economies. Many of those nations, and aspiring members of the bloc, have cut deals with Trump, or are likely to do so. Brazil will come to some arrangement. So has Trump got away with it? His aides reckoned that access to the American market is too lucrative to pass up, and they may have been right. It would also be naive to conclude there won't be any cost. The global economy has slowed but hasn't crashed, foreigners still purchase US Treasuries and it's a safe bet that the greenback will be at the centre of the financial system for years. But the nations humiliated won't forget this experience. Asia's economies will only get bigger and the siren call of greater integration with China will get louder. Trump's efforts to destroy the existing order may yet prove an own goal. Just not this year. Clayton, who became the top economic official at the State Department, believed that robust trade among the shattered nations of Western Europe was as important as physical rebuilding. The economic dislocation wrought by the conflagration had been underestimated; capitalism could revive the continent and prevent the political implosion of key countries. According to Benn Steil's book The Marshall Plan: Dawn of the Cold War, Clayton insisted that the US 'must run this show.' Trump's team brag about reconfiguring the system that grew from the ideals of the post-war era. The hubris may ultimately prove misplaced.
