The National Intelligence Council of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence found:
> The IC assesses that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure that occurred no later than November 2019 with the first known cluster of COVID-19 cases arising in Wuhan, China in December 2019.
And that:
> As of August 2021, we still have not observed genetic signatures in SARS-CoV-2 that would be diagnostic of genetic engineering, according to the IC’s understanding of the virus. Similarly, we have not identified any existing coronavirus strains that could have plausibly served as a backbone if SARS-CoV-2 had been genetically engineered.
Also:
> The WIV previously created chimeras, or combinations, of SARS-like coronaviruses, but this information does not provide insight into whether SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered by the WIV.
And:
> Early in the pandemic, the WIV identified that a new virus was responsible for the outbreak in Wuhan. It is therefore assessed that WIV researchers pivoted to COVID-19-related work to address the outbreak and characterize the virus. These activities suggest that WIV personnel were unaware of the existence of SARS-CoV-2 until the outbreak was underway.
And as far as spillover from collected samples in the lab goes:
> They also see the potential that a laboratory worker inadvertently was infected while collecting unknown animal specimens to be less likely than an infection occurring through numerous hunters, farmers, merchants, and others who have frequent, natural contact with animals
> Prior to the pandemic, we assess WIV scientists conducted extensive research on coronaviruses, which included animal sampling and genetic analysis. We continue to have no indication that the WIV’s pre-pandemic research holdings included SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor, nor any direct evidence that a specific research-related incident occurred involving WIV personnel before the pandemic that could have caused the COVID pandemic.
No idea why DOE continues to think it was a lab leak, other than we can't definitively prove it wasn't and since ChinaBad(tm) we have to assume it was.
I am assuming the 1 IC element in the link I reference below is the DOE. It claims
"One IC element assesses with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These analysts give weight to the inherently risky nature of work on coronaviruses."
Based on the quote (if the one IC element is in fact the DOE) is seem they are basing it on the "inherently risky nature of the work on coronaviruses.
I do find it interesting this was given with moderate confidence but the natural occurring is only given low confidence. Any idea how the whole confidence level is determined?
The DOE seems to have assigned "moderate" confidence to the idea of a lab leak on the basis of zero concrete evidence. Taking the assessment on the whole it seems obvious to me that the argument from them is weak, but the assessment can't come out and just state that in plain English.
The thing here that confuses me is that the DoE is definitely the gov't agency I most associate with Health. \s
Why are we giving so much wait to the organization that says "Energy" in the name over one that says "Health" in the name? And is there a convincing reason that's not: "It's the department I agree with the most on this issue."
> The IC assesses that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure that occurred no later than November 2019 with the first known cluster of COVID-19 cases arising in Wuhan, China in December 2019.
And that:
> As of August 2021, we still have not observed genetic signatures in SARS-CoV-2 that would be diagnostic of genetic engineering, according to the IC’s understanding of the virus. Similarly, we have not identified any existing coronavirus strains that could have plausibly served as a backbone if SARS-CoV-2 had been genetically engineered.
Also:
> The WIV previously created chimeras, or combinations, of SARS-like coronaviruses, but this information does not provide insight into whether SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered by the WIV.
And:
> Early in the pandemic, the WIV identified that a new virus was responsible for the outbreak in Wuhan. It is therefore assessed that WIV researchers pivoted to COVID-19-related work to address the outbreak and characterize the virus. These activities suggest that WIV personnel were unaware of the existence of SARS-CoV-2 until the outbreak was underway.
And as far as spillover from collected samples in the lab goes:
> They also see the potential that a laboratory worker inadvertently was infected while collecting unknown animal specimens to be less likely than an infection occurring through numerous hunters, farmers, merchants, and others who have frequent, natural contact with animals
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Declass...
A prior declassified report found:
> Prior to the pandemic, we assess WIV scientists conducted extensive research on coronaviruses, which included animal sampling and genetic analysis. We continue to have no indication that the WIV’s pre-pandemic research holdings included SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor, nor any direct evidence that a specific research-related incident occurred involving WIV personnel before the pandemic that could have caused the COVID pandemic.
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Report-...
No idea why DOE continues to think it was a lab leak, other than we can't definitively prove it wasn't and since ChinaBad(tm) we have to assume it was.