The evidence remains clear: SARS-CoV-2 emerged via the wildlife trade

The harms of promoting the lab leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 origins without evidence

Science is humanity's best insurance against threats from nature, but it is a fragile enterprise that must be nourished and protected. The preponderance of scientific evidence indicates a natural origin for SARS-CoV-2. Yet, the theory that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered in and escaped from a lab dominates media attention, even in the absence of strong evidence. We discuss how the resulting anti-science movement puts the research community, scientific research, and pandemic preparedness at risk.

Avoiding novel, unwanted interactions among species to decrease risk of zoonoses

Circumstances that precipitate interactions among species that have never interacted during their evolutionary histories create ideal conditions for the generation of zoonoses. Zoonotic diseases have caused some of the most devastating epidemics in human history. Contact among species that come from different ecosystems or regions creates the risk of zoonoses. In certain situations, humans are generating and promoting conditions that contribute to the creation of infectious diseases and zoonoses. These conditions lead to interactions between wildlife species that have hitherto not interacted under normal circumstances. I call for recognition of the zoonotic potential that novel and unwanted interactions have; identification of these new interactions that are occurring among wild animals, domestic animals, and humans; and efforts to stop these kinds of interactions because they can give rise to zoonotic outbreaks. Live animal markets, the exotic pet trade, illegal wildlife trade, human use and consumption of wild animals, invasive non-native species, releasing of exotic pets, and human encroachment in natural areas are among the activities that cause the most interactions among wild species, domestic species, and humans. These activities should not occur and must be controlled efficiently to prevent future epidemic zoonoses. Society must develop a keen ability to identify these unnatural interactions and prevent them. Controlling these interactions and efficiently addressing their causal factors will benefit human health and, in some cases, lead to positive environmental, ethical, and socioeconomic outcomes. Until these actions are taken, humanity will face future zoonoses and zoonotic pandemic.

Biophysical evolution of the receptor-binding domains of SARS-CoVs

With hundreds of coronaviruses (CoVs) identified in bats that can infect humans, it is essential to understand how CoVs that affected the human population have evolved. Seven known CoVs have infected humans, of which three CoVs caused severe disease with high mortalities: severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-CoV emerged in 2002, Middle East respiratory syndrome-CoV in 2012, and SARS-CoV-2 in 2019. SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 belong to the same family, follow the same receptor pathway, and use their receptor-binding domain (RBD) of spike protein to bind to the angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) receptor on the human epithelial cell surface. The sequence of the two RBDs is divergent, especially in the receptor-binding motif that directly interacts with ACE2. We probed the biophysical differences between the two RBDs in terms of their structure, stability, aggregation, and function. Since RBD is being explored as an antigen in protein subunit vaccines against CoVs, determining these biophysical properties will also aid in developing stable protein subunit vaccines. Our results show that, despite RBDs having a similar three-dimensional structure, they differ in their thermodynamic stability. RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is significantly less stable than that of SARS-CoV. Correspondingly, SARS-CoV-2 RBD shows a higher aggregation propensity. Regarding binding to ACE2, less stable SARS-CoV-2 RBD binds with a higher affinity than more stable SARS-CoV RBD. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 RBD is more homogenous in terms of its binding stoichiometry toward ACE2 compared to SARS-CoV RBD. These results indicate that SARS-CoV-2 RBD differs from SARS-CoV RBD in terms of its stability, aggregation, and function, possibly originating from the diverse receptor-binding motifs. Higher aggregation propensity and decreased stability of SARS-CoV-2 RBD warrant further optimization of protein subunit vaccines that use RBD as an antigen by inserting stabilizing mutations or formulation screening.

Viral infections at the animal-human interface-Learning lessons from the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic

This Lilliput explores the current epidemiological and virological arguments for a zoonotic origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the role of bats, pangolins and racoon dogs as viral reservoirs has not yet been proven, a spill-over of a coronavirus infection from animals into humans at the Huanan food market in Wuhan has a much greater plausibility than alternative hypotheses such as a laboratory virus escape, deliberate genetic engineering or introduction by cold chain food products. This Lilliput highlights the dynamic nature of the animal-human interface for viral cross-infections from humans into feral white tail deer or farmed minks (reverse zoonosis). Surveillance of viral infections at the animal-human interface is an urgent task since live animal markets are not the only risks for future viral spill-overs. Climate change will induce animal migration which leads to viral exchanges between animal species that have not met in the past. Environmental change and deforestation will also increase contact between animals and humans. Developing an early warning system for emerging viral infections becomes thus a societal necessity not only for human but also for animal and environmental health (One Health concept). Microbiologists have developed tools ranging from virome analysis in key suspects such as viral reservoirs (bats, wild game animals, bushmeat) and in humans exposed to wild animals, to wastewater analysis to detect known and unknown viruses circulating in the human population and sentinel studies in animal-exposed patients with fever. Criteria need to be developed to assess the virulence and transmissibility of zoonotic viruses. An early virus warning system is costly and will need political lobbying. The accelerating number of viral infections with pandemic potential over the last decades should provide the public pressure to extend pandemic preparedness for the inclusion of early viral alert systems.

Emerging infectious diseases never end: The fight continues

Emerging infectious diseases have accompanied the development of human society while causing great harm to humans, and SARS-CoV-2 was only one in the long list of microbial threats. Many viruses have existed in their natural reservoirs for a very long time, and the spillover of viruses from natural hosts to humans via interspecies transmission serves as the main source of emerging infectious diseases. Widely existing viruses capable of utilizing human receptors to infect human cells in animals signal the possible outbreak of another viral infection in the near future. Extensive and close collaborative surveillance across nations, more effective wildlife trade legislation, and robust investment into applied and basic research will help to combat the possible pandemics of new emerging infectious diseases in the future.

Updated analysis to reject the laboratory-engineering hypothesis of SARS-CoV-2

A clear understanding of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is important for future pandemic preparedness. Here, I provided an updated analysis of the type IIS endonuclease maps in genomes of alphacoronavirus, betacoronavirus, and SARS-CoV-2. Scenarios to engineer SARS-CoV-2 in the laboratory and the associated workload was also discussed. The analysis clearly shows that the endonuclease fingerprint does not indicate a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV-2 and engineering a SARS-CoV-2 virus in the laboratory is extremely challenging both scientifically and financially. On the contrary, current scientific evidence does support the animal origin of SARS-CoV-2.

Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse

Viruses have brought humanity many challenges: respiratory infection, cancer, neurological impairment and immunosuppression to name a few. Virology research over the last 60+ years has responded to reduce this disease burden with vaccines and antivirals. Despite this long history, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented attention to the field of virology. Some of this attention is focused on concern about the safe conduct of research with human pathogens. A small but vocal group of individuals has seized upon these concerns - conflating legitimate questions about safely conducting virus-related research with uncertainties over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The result has fueled public confusion and, in many instances, ill-informed condemnation of virology. With this article, we seek to promote a return to rational discourse. We explain the use of gain-of-function approaches in science, discuss the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2 and outline current regulatory structures that provide oversight for virological research in the United States. By offering our expertise, we - a broad group of working virologists - seek to aid policy makers in navigating these controversial issues. Balanced, evidence-based discourse is essential to addressing public concern while maintaining and expanding much-needed research in virology.

Comparative susceptibility of SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV across mammals

Exploring wild reservoirs of pathogenic viruses is critical for their long-term control and for predicting future pandemic scenarios. Here, a comparative in vitro infection analysis was first performed on 83 cell cultures derived from 55 mammalian species using pseudotyped viruses bearing S proteins from SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV. Cell cultures from Thomas's horseshoe bats, king horseshoe bats, green monkeys, and ferrets were found to be highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, and MERS-CoV pseudotyped viruses. Moreover, five variants (del69-70, D80Y, S98F, T572I, and Q675H), that beside spike receptor-binding domain can significantly alter the host tropism of SARS-CoV-2. An examination of phylogenetic signals of transduction rates revealed that closely related taxa generally have similar susceptibility to MERS-CoV but not to SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 pseudotyped viruses. Additionally, we discovered that the expression of 95 genes, e.g., PZDK1 and APOBEC3, were commonly associated with the transduction rates of SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, and SARS-CoV-2 pseudotyped viruses. This study provides basic documentation of the susceptibility, variants, and molecules that underlie the cross-species transmission of these coronaviruses.

Gain-of-function and origin of Covid19

In nature, wild viruses adapted for transmission circulate in many animal species (bats, birds, primates…). Contamination of other animals, including humans, may occur by crossing of the species barrier. Genetic manipulations have been carried out on wild viruses to favor the species jumping and to increase of viral virulence. The aim was to identify the critical genes for pathogenicity. This has been mainly performed on potentially epidemic pathogens, as Myxovirus influenzae of avian flu and coronaviruses of SARS and MERS epidemics. These dangerous experiments were subject to a moratorium in the United States (2014-2017). Three years after the emergence of Covid-19, the origin of du SARS-CoV2 remains a mystery. Covid19 appeared in Wuhan, officially in December 2019, but probably during the autumn 2019. The virus was identified in January 2020. It belongs to the genus Betacoronavirus (subgenus Sarbecovirus). It was at once highly contagious. In addition, the primary isolates were genetically very homogeneous, differing only by two nucleotides without evidence for adaptive mutations. In addition, the Spike protein, a major virulence factor, has a furin site, not found in any other known sarbecovirus. Unlike the SARS and MERS epidemics, no intermediate host has been detected so far. Finally, no other outbreaks were reported at the beginning of the pandemic outside of Wuhan, contrary to what happened with the emergence of SARS (2002) and H7N9 avian influenza (2013). Today, there are two scenarios to explain the emergence of SARS-CoV2. Proponents of the natural origin argue that the bat virus might have directly infected humans, spreading silently at a low level in humans for years, without eliminating the existence of undetected intermediate hosts. This does not explain the origin in Wuhan, far away from the natural virus reservoirs. The furin site would have arisen spontaneously from other coronaviruses. The alternative scenario is that of a laboratory accident after gain-of-function manipulations from a SARS-like virus, or even the occurrence of a human contamination by a natural CoV virus grown on cells in Wuhan. This article is an update to the Quarterly Medical Review (QMR) devoted to the history of modern pandemics. To access this QMR contents, please go here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/la-presse-medicale/vol/51/issue/3.

Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse

Viruses have brought humanity many challenges: respiratory infection, cancer, neurological impairment and immunosuppression to name a few. Virology research over the last 60+ years has responded to reduce this disease burden with vaccines and antivirals. Despite this long history, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented attention to the field of virology. Some of this attention is focused on concern about the safe conduct of research with human pathogens. A small but vocal group of individuals has seized upon these concerns - conflating legitimate questions about safely conducting virus-related research with uncertainties over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The result has fueled public confusion and, in many instances, ill-informed condemnation of virology. With this article, we seek to promote a return to rational discourse. We explain the use of gain-of-function approaches in science, discuss the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2 and outline current regulatory structures that provide oversight for virological research in the United States. By offering our expertise, we - a broad group of working virologists - seek to aid policy makers in navigating these controversial issues. Balanced, evidence-based discourse is essential to addressing public concern while maintaining and expanding much-needed research in virology.

Virology under the Microscope-a Call for Rational Discourse

Viruses have brought humanity many challenges: respiratory infection, cancer, neurological impairment and immunosuppression to name a few. Virology research over the last 60+ years has responded to reduce this disease burden with vaccines and antivirals. Despite this long history, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought unprecedented attention to the field of virology. Some of this attention is focused on concern about the safe conduct of research with human pathogens. A small but vocal group of individuals has seized upon these concerns - conflating legitimate questions about safely conducting virus-related research with uncertainties over the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The result has fueled public confusion and, in many instances, ill-informed condemnation of virology. With this article, we seek to promote a return to rational discourse. We explain the use of gain-of-function approaches in science, discuss the possible origins of SARS-CoV-2 and outline current regulatory structures that provide oversight for virological research in the United States. By offering our expertise, we - a broad group of working virologists - seek to aid policy makers in navigating these controversial issues. Balanced, evidence-based discourse is essential to addressing public concern while maintaining and expanding much-needed research in virology.

ChatGPT Output Regarding Compulsory Vaccination and COVID-19 Vaccine Conspiracy: A Descriptive Study at the Outset of a Paradigm Shift in Online Search for Information

BACKGROUND

Being on the verge of a revolutionary approach to gathering information, ChatGPT (an artificial intelligence (AI)-based language model developed by OpenAI, and capable of producing human-like text) could be the prime motive of a paradigm shift on how humans will acquire information. Despite the concerns related to the use of such a promising tool in relation to the future of the quality of education, this technology will soon be incorporated into web search engines mandating the need to evaluate the output of such a tool. Previous studies showed that dependence on some sources of online information (e.g., social media platforms) was associated with higher rates of vaccination hesitancy. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to describe the output of ChatGPT regarding coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine conspiracy beliefs. and compulsory vaccination.

METHODS

The current descriptive study was conducted on January 14, 2023 using the ChatGPT from OpenAI (OpenAI, L.L.C., San Francisco, CA, USA). The output was evaluated by two authors and the degree of agreement regarding the correctness, clarity, conciseness, and bias was evaluated using Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

The ChatGPT responses were dismissive of conspiratorial ideas about severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) origins labeling it as non-credible and lacking scientific evidence. Additionally, ChatGPT responses were totally against COVID-19 vaccine conspiracy statements. Regarding compulsory vaccination, ChatGPT responses were neutral citing the following as advantages of this strategy: protecting public health, maintaining herd immunity, reducing the spread of disease, cost-effectiveness, and legal obligation, and on the other hand, it cited the following as disadvantages of compulsory vaccination: ethical and legal concerns, mistrust and resistance, logistical challenges, and limited resources and knowledge.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed that ChatGPT could be a source of information to challenge COVID-19 vaccine conspiracies. For compulsory vaccination, ChatGPT resonated with the divided opinion in the scientific community toward such a strategy; nevertheless, it detailed the pros and cons of this approach. As it currently stands, the judicious use of ChatGPT could be utilized as a user-friendly source of COVID-19 vaccine information that could challenge conspiracy ideas with clear, concise, and non-biased content. However, ChatGPT content cannot be used as an alternative to the original reliable sources of vaccine information (e.g., the World Health Organization [WHO] and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC]).