Don’t rule out the possibility of a lab leak: the former head of China’s CDC on the genesis of COVID-19

Prof. Gao also informed the news agency that some sort of formal investigation into the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was done, which may be a clue that the Chinese government may have taken the possibility of a lab leak more seriously than its public pronouncements imply.

Professor Gao said the following in an interview that was broadcast as a podcast on BBC Radio 4: “You may always suspect anything. This is a scientific fact. Don’t eliminate any possibilities,” After leaving his position as a virologist and immunologist at the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2022, Professor Gao is now serving as vice president of the National Natural Science Foundation of China.

COVID-19

Prof. Gao also informed the news agency that some sort of formal investigation into the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was done, which may be a clue that the Chinese government may have taken the possibility of a lab leak more seriously than its public pronouncements imply.

“The government organised something,” he claims, adding that his own department, the China Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, was not involved in it.

When pressed to clarify whether it meant another part of government carried out an official search of the WIV – one of China’s top national laboratories, known to have spent years investigating coronaviruses – the professor answered, “Yeah, that lab was double-checked by the experts in the field.” The WIV is one of China’s top national laboratories, known to have spent years studying coronaviruses.

It is the first time that it has been acknowledged that an official inquiry of some kind took place. Professor Gao stated that he has not seen the result of the study, but he has “heard” that the laboratory has been awarded a clean bill of health. “I believe that they have come to the judgement that they are adhering to all of the protocols. They have not uncovered any evidence of misconduct.”

However, other scientists have stated that there is not enough evidence to rule out the primary alternative scenario, which is that the virus infected someone who participated in research that was aimed to gain a better understanding of the danger posed by viruses emerging from natural environments.

//