An open debate on SARS-CoV-2's proximal origin is long overdue
Abstract
There is a near consensus view that SARS-CoV-2 has a natural zoonotic origin; however, several characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 taken together are not easily explained by a natural zoonotic origin hypothesis. These include: a low rate of evolution in the early phase of transmission; the lack of evidence of recombination events; a high pre-existing binding to human ACE2; a novel furin cleavage site insert; a flat glycan binding domain of the spike protein which conflicts with host evasion survival patterns exhibited by other coronaviruses, and high human and mouse peptide mimicry. Initial assumptions against a laboratory origin, by contrast, have remained unsubstantiated. Furthermore, over a year after the initial outbreak in Wuhan, there is still no clear evidence of zoonotic transfer from a bat or intermediate species. Given the immense social and economic impact of this pandemic, identifying the true origin of SARS-CoV-2 is fundamental to preventing future outbreaks. The search for SARS-CoV-2's origin should include an open and unbiased inquiry into a possible laboratory origin.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2102.03910,
title = {An open debate on SARS-CoV-2's proximal origin is long overdue},
author = {Rossana Segreto and Yuri Deigin and Kevin McCairn and Alejandro Sousa and Dan Sirotkin and Karl Sirotkin and Jonathan J. Couey and Adrian Jones and Daoyu Zhang},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.03910},
year = {2021}
}