TWO SCIENTISTS, one British and one Norwegian, have recently published a study from which it could be concluded that the virus SARS-CoV-2 had been artificially created in a laboratory.

According to an article published in the Quarterly Review of Biophysics, a new coronavirus protein spike contains some sections that seem to be artificially added to increase the efficiency of the virus.  

In the article summary, and later in its elaboration, the Norvegian virologist Birger Sørensen and the British oncologist Angus Dalgleish state that they've identified the "inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface," which are crucial for the communication between the virus and human cells, and for entering the human cells.

In an interview for the Norwegian television NRK, Sørensen said that the virus has features that significantly differ from the other coronaviruses (the causing agent of SARS), which have never been discovered in nature. He stated that China and the USA had been collaborating for years on coronavirus studies about "acquiring functions," in which pathogenicity or the virus transmission can be increased to understand it better.

British intelligence agent supported the scientists' thesis

Sir Richard Dearlove defended the British-Norwegian duo's thesis. He was head of the British Secret Intelligence Service M16 from 1999 to 2004. 

Moreover, he's made a step further in his claims - for Daily Telegraph, he claimed that Sørensen and Dalgleish research show that the pandemic perhaps started on the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He also stated that there's a slight possibility that the virus leaked on purpose, but pointed out that China clearly tried to conceal its oversight.

The exchange of accusations on Washington - Beijing route 

It's not the first time these theses appear. Chinese and American politicians have been exchanging these COVID-19 accusations for months. 

Since coronavirus arrived in the USA, the top leadership of Donald Trump's administration has been promoting rumors that the virus was created in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. 

Chinese officials answered back. For example, Zhao Lijian, spokesman and Deputy Director in the Department of Information at the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted on Twitter: 

"CDC was caught on the spot. When did patient zero begin in the US? How many people are infected? What are the names of the hospitals? It might be the US army that brought the epidemic to Wuhan. Be transparent! Make public your data! The US owes us an explanation!"

Arguments against the artificial origin of the virus

Index has published texts about the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 is artificially created in a laboratory. To sum it up, we've introduced a few crucial arguments of our experts, Vanda Juranic Lisnic, a virologist at the Faculty of Medicine in Rijeka and Kristian Vlahovicek, a molecular biologist at the Faculty of Science in Zagreb. It could be concluded from the arguments that there's a slim chance that the virus is artificially created, or that it leaked by mistake, although not entirely non-existent. 

We've especially pointed out that the traces of genetic manipulation would be clearly visible in the virus because normally, the scientists who are changing the virus label them. Except if it was created with a purpose to start a pandemic, which would be insane because viruses know no boundaries. We've also explained that there's a slim chance of the virus leaking from the highest biosafety level 4 lab, which our virologist had an opportunity to witness during her visit to China. Finally, if the virus was artificially created as some bioweapon, it would be expected to be much more lethal. 

In the meantime, many experts from many countries, including the USA and China, have already dismissed the thesis about lab manipulation many times.

For example, a study published in a medical journal Lancet, shows that 27 people infected with COVID-19 in an early phase of the epidemic could clearly be linked with Wuhan wet market. 

On the other hand, another study published in a scientific journal Current Biology on May 10, revealed coronavirus in bats, which is in some genome regions closely related to SARS-CoV-2, and which contains amino acids at the junction site of the S1 and S2 subunits of the spike protein in a way similar to SARS-CoV-2. Although not a direct evolutionary relative of SARS-CoV-2, the discovered virus RmYN02 suggests that these kinds of seemingly unusual events of inserting can naturally occur in the evolution of coronavirus.

It's more likely that the change in the virus is natural, rather than artificial

A similar revelation was followed after publishing of the new study.

Vlahovicek claims that, despite the huge advancement in molecular biology in understanding living things, and through the CRISPR-Cas method of gene editing in the last few years, we're still far away from designing a new life, even the simplest one, by choosing the features from a catalog and putting them together in genes like legos.

"When it comes to improving the existing features, as it should be the case in the example of adjusting one protein to match the human, the success of a lab manipulation is even smaller. Evolution and natural selection are far more advanced and efficient in that area," said our molecular biologist for Index. 

"But, even if it were routinely possible, there's a question if such a procedure serves the purpose, especially if we haven't inserted some sort of protector in an organism we want to change to be more infective, the so-called kill switch, by which we could neutralize the threat if something goes wrong. The majority of the pathogenic microbes, and especially pathogenic viruses, are into disrepute because of their ability to adjust to new organisms or to change its features through quick and frequent reproduction. That's why anyone who, even in the most bizarre case, wants to create a pathogenic virus, the installation of the kill switch should be the priority. In the last couple of months, SARS-CoV-2 has been read many times, and its genetic sequencing has been analyzed and studied down to the smallest detail. No one has ever found anything similar to a potential artificial signature, some sort of protector, or anything that could imply that this virus had been created artificially, rather than undergoing evolution," he explained. 

"The natural transmission is far more likely"

Vlahovicek points out that, on the other hand, it's true that experiments are conducted on coronaviruses to understand their biology and evolution better. 

"It's a completely legitimate scientific interest. Moreover, if there were more of that interest, maybe we would have some sort of vaccine against coronavirus. But those working with pathogenic viruses usually have excellent training and equipment, so the chance of a virus leaking from a laboratory by accident is extremely slim. Of course, people aren't flawless and unexpected accidents can happen in any job. But if we compare the probability of a virus made completely naturally to a probability it leaked from a laboratory, the natural transmission is far more likely. All the more so because it wouldn't be the first case of that kind of transmission. Again, evolution and natural selection are very successful in this job," explains our scientists. 

In a comment on the new study, virologists also point out that similar implants, which were revealed in SARS-CoV-2 in the new study, are naturally occurring in the genome of other viruses, for example, other coronaviruses or HIV. 

As an argument to support the thesis of an artificial origin of the virus, the work of the Norwegian-British team suggests that the virus mutation is poor once it appears in the human population. It should imply that the virus was well adjusted to transmission to people from the very beginning of the pandemic. 

But this thesis also doesn't add up because numerous research clearly shows that SARS-CoV-2 continuously mutates. 

Possible conflict of interest of a Norwegian virologist

For a complete understanding of the dubiousness of the British-Norwegian study, it's also important to point out that Sørensen could have a personal interest in attractive theses for the media about the artificial origin of the new coronavirus.

In fact, a study published in Quarterly Review of Biophysics primarily introduces arguments for the development of Biovacc-19, a candidate vaccine for COVID-19, which is currently in advanced preclinical development. And Sørensen has a financial interest in this story because he works for Immunor, a Norwegian company behind the vaccine. 

Intelligent services also refute the thesis

Finally, the American intelligence services and the scientists have already refuted the thesis of an artificially created virus. In this new case, British intelligence sources have also denied it. 

According to the British times, the British MI5 dismissed the idea as "rumor and conspiracy," and compared it to the anti-vaccination movement's claims.   

Among other, the text points out that Dearlove (75) had already been under fire for promoting "flawed intelligence" in the investigation of Sir John Chilcot which showed that the war in Iraq wasn't the only possible solution as claimed by the British high politics before the beginning of the invasion.