The WHO hopes its new panel can determine the origin of COVID-19. Some experts are skeptical

An "imbalanced" groupof experts and China's resistance to co-operatemeans theWorld Health Organization's new panelis unlikely to determine whether the originof COVID-19can be found in nature or traced to a lab leak, some experts suggest.

The WHO announced last week it had formed a new advisory group to look into the originsof emerging and re-emerging pathogens of epidemic and pandemic potential, including COVID-19.

Called the Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO), the26-memberproposed panel includesfour members who took part ina WHO-led team that spent four weeks in and around Wuhan earlier this year with Chinese scientists.

AlinaChan,a Canadian molecular biologist at the Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, said she doesn't have much faith in it.

"Based on the outcomes of the China-WHO joint study and the persistent lack of access to data and information in China, I'm not confident that the current list of SAGO members will make any headway into the origin of COVID-19," Chan,who alsolaunched anopen-source website to track COVID-19's genetic evolution, told CBC News in an email.

She wasone of18 scientists who signed a letter in May that was published in Science. It criticized the original panel'sreport about the origin of COVID-19 fornot giving proper consideration to the lab-leak theory.

In an email to CBC News, Chan questioned the compositionof the new panel, suggesting that some of the members from the original group who are on this new panel may carry biases.

Shesaidshe was disappointed that WHO did not take theopportunity to start SAGO on a clean slate and to pick experts who are as "uncontroversial as possible."

"Most of the international experts convened on the highly criticized initial joint study with China are back on SAGO," Chan said in an email to CBC News,"It will now be difficult to convince people that the new SAGO will be much different from the original joint study group.

'Could have been a fresh start'

"This could have been a fresh start to a WHO investigation of the origin of COVID, but they picked a committee that is, in my opinion, imbalanced and lacking in strong expertise in biosecurity and bioengineering."

Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University whodirects the World Health Organization Center on Global Health Law, also expressed skepticismabout the panel's potential success.

"Thisnew committee is highly reliant on China to allow them access to its territory, its scientific samples and its people independent scientists, whistle blowers, health care workers and others," he said in a phone interview with CBC News.

"Tryingto find the origins without China's co-operation is going to be extremely difficult.If the U.S.intelligence agencies couldn't do it usingcovert methods, Idon't know how a WHO team of scientists can possibly do that."

Last March, an initial team of WHO investigators released a report that determined that it was"likely to very likely," the coronavirushad a zoonotic source, meaning it was transmitted to humans by animals.They also concludedthe idea thata laboratory incident was the source was"extremely unlikely."

But that reportwassubsequently criticized by the U.S., Canada, members of the scientific community and other governmentsfor the lack of access granted to the investigators.WHO Director-General Dr.Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesusalsoexpressed concernsabout the investigation,that the assessment was not"extensive enough"and that "further data and studies will be needed to reach more robust conclusions."

'2 theories not given balanced consideration'

"The two theories were not given balanced consideration," the scientists wrote in their letter. "Only fourof the 313 pages of the report and its annexes addressed the possibility of a laboratory accident."

"We must take hypotheses about both natural and laboratory spillovers seriously until we have sufficient data."

Thelab-leak theory postulatesthat researchers at theWuhan Institute of Virology, which does work with coronaviruses, may have been studying or even modifying such viruses tobetter understand them, and that alab accident may have allowed the virus to escape.

Initially dismissed as a conspiracy theory, the notion has since gained acceptance among some members of the scientific community that it's an avenue at leastworth exploring.

Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at theBaylor College of Medicine, said he still believes thata natural origin is most likely, but that both theories should be investigated.

Still, hequestioned whether the WHO or any international body issuing a report will be that effective.

"What we need is a commitment from the Chinese to work with one or multiple countries to do this proper outbreak investigation," he said.

Hotez, who was a U.S. science envoy for the Obama administration, said there needs to be a year-long investigation in central China, which would require a teamof international or U.S. and Chinese scientists all working together.

That team would be tasked with collectingsamples from bats, exotic animals, livestock, along with virus samples and blood samples "and really identify at a granular level the origins of COVID-19," he said.

'They feel it's a witch hunt'

Instead, toomany people with political agendas have been allowed to level unfounded charges to the point whereChina is nowunco-operative in any kind of an international investigation,"likely because they feel it's a witch hunt," Hotez said.

"Andthere's been way too much emphasis on banging on the door of the Wuhan Institute, saying: 'Show me your lab notebooks' when we should realize by this point it's not going to be productive and it's not going to happen."

In July, China said it would not accept the World Health Organization's plan for the second phase of a study into the origins of COVID-19. Meanwhile, following WHO's announcement,Chen Xu, China's ambassador to the UN in Geneva, said the conclusions of the first joint study were "quite clear,"adding thatinternational teams had been sent to China twice already.

"It is time to send teams to other places," the ambassador said.

WATCH |Vaccine inequity 'driving up transmissions' despite declining caseloads, WHO official says:

Vaccine inequity 'driving up transmissions' despite declining caseloads, WHO official says

3 years ago

Duration 9:02

Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, the World Health Organization's COVID-19 technical lead, tells Power & Politics that despite the weekly decline in cases and deaths around the world, the lack of vaccine equity is still driving up infections in COVID-19 hotspots globally.

ArinjayBanerjee, a research scientist with VIDO-Intervac, a vaccine research facility at the University of Saskatchewan, said in any context,definitively determining the source of COVID-19 could be very challenging.

He said he believes the anecdotal evidence certainly supports a zoonotic transmission, but it would be difficult to definitively prove.

"You have to get very lucky," he said. "When it happens, it's so transient, you just can't pinpoint where it happened."

For example, scientists were able to connecttheMiddle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) to camels because they found the virus in camels,Banerjee said.

"If the samples are lost, if the sample have been consumed or they've gone from the wet food markets, like how would you ever find out what happened?

"I would say it'snot like looking for a needle in the haystack. It's like looking for a needle in a needle stack."