Statement
The Coronavirus is a laboratory product, according to a survey, almost one-third of Americans- most of them say that the pathogen had been deliberately bred.
Rating
Scientists think that is not plausible.
Facts
In fact, the final findings are still missing today, how the man could originally have exactly infected with the novel Coronavirus is attached.
Quickly, it was clear that The causative agent is a type of the since decades well-known group of corona viruses. A long time of expert knowledge that these highly variable viruses can skip between animals and from animals to humans.
Meanwhile, there are but scientific progress: in mid-March, published researchers in the Swedish micro-biology Professor Kristian Andersen your analysis of the Corona family.
The Team went after specifically the question of whether the Virus could artificially be made.
To do this, they examined the Spike proteins protruding from the Virus surface. These spines, the pathogen uses a host cell in the lungs or throat snap and penetrate into it.
The study shows in particular two important differences between Sars-CoV-2 and its Relatives: Simplifies the Protein has a different structure and a different composition of its amino acids.
The researchers emphasize, on the basis of the studied characteristics of the new Virus could infect especially easily to human cells. However, the Whole was not designed as optimally as you would expect from a man-made bioweapon.
“This is a strong evidence that Sars-CoV-2 is not the product of a deliberate Manipulation,” reads the analysis.
In addition, it is not at all clear why it should have developed Sars-CoV-2 from a yet for people a harmless Virus and not from long-known dangerous Corona-Relatives, such as Mers or Sars. The scientists keep a lab scenario, therefore, not plausible.
for you only comes in a natural Transmission to humans is in question: Either the Virus could be spread directly from bats, or a animal intermediate host used.
It is still unclear whether Sars-CoV-2 mutant and the previous, so that it binds more easily to human cells, or only later, when it may already have undetected among the people circulated.
The Berlin-based virologist Christian Drosten, and more than two dozen researchers and scientists reject inside in an article by the beginning of March the theory of the laboratory of origin strictly.
China’s authorities see it as likely that the virus spread from the sale of the wild animals on the Huannan market is assumed to be in the first affected million metropolis of Wuhan.
Many of the first cases of the infections were attributed to this market. A further study of Chinese scientists, it is possible that the market was the primary source, but the Virus has been dragged from elsewhere there.
Deutsche Presse-Agentur (dpa)
*The contribution of “the origin of the pandemic: is the Coronavirus from a laboratory?” will be published by FitForFun. Contact with the executives here.