科學家窺見新疫情的起源（2/2）

Recently the New York Times reported the following:

Scientists Get a Glimpse of How New Pandemics Are Made (2/2)

Researchers have devised a new tool for discerning between naturally occurring viral outbreaks and those resulting from lab accidents.

The NYT - By Carl Zimmer

March 9, 2026

Updated 9:43 a.m. ET

(continue)

Since then, researchers have not found direct evidence to test this scenario or others like it. But the new study by Dr. Wertheim and his colleagues concluded that the 1977 virus underwent some odd evolution before the pandemic — and that the mutations it gained bear patterns identical to those found in viruses that are grown in labs.

Gigi Gronvall, a biosecurity expert at Johns Hopkins University, said that the new study suggests that the 1977 pandemic began as a vaccine trial. “It’s more evidence that they were trying to create an attenuated vaccine and failed spectacularly,” she said.

Spyros Lytras, a virologist at the University of Tokyo who was not involved in the new study, said the study’s methodology offered a new tool for tracing the origin of outbreaks. “The genetic data holds a robust signal that can distinguish between lab passaging and manipulations versus natural spillovers,” he said.

James Lloyd-Smith, a disease ecologist at the University of California, Los Angeles, said that detecting the genetic signature of lab evolution in the Russian flu was “very cool.” But he cautioned that scientists typically only capture a fraction of the evolution of viruses in their samples. “This approach isn’t a magic wand, and the study still faces the same challenges of limited data that have dogged the field,” he said.

Of the several outbreaks that Dr. Wertheim and his colleagues analyzed, only the Russian flu proved to be an exception to the rule. The virus that caused Covid — SARS-CoV-2 — was not.

The researchers found no peculiar changes in SARS-CoV-2 before it jumped into humans. It gained mutations as it spread from bat to bat, just like other bat coronaviruses did; only after the virus emerged in humans did it undergo a marked shift. Within a year, radically new variants were evolving, with mutations that made them exquisitely well-adapted to humans.

The new study adds to the ongoing debate over Covid’s origins. In a January interview with The New York Times, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the director of the National Institutes of Health, asserted that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a lab. “I think if you just focus on the scientific evidence alone, I would say it’s certain,” he said.

Some experts who favor a lab-leak origin point to just how well prepared SARS-CoV-2 was to spread among humans from the start of the pandemic. In November, Dr. Robert Redfield, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, claimed that the Chinese military had created SARS-CoV-2 as an inhaled vaccine. “I think that was all engineered,” Dr. Redfield said in a podcast interview.

But last month, a group of experts assigned by the World Health Organization to examine Covid’s origins came down in favor of SARS-CoV-2 having originated in bats, which then passed it to animals sold in a market in Wuhan.

“Most of the peer-reviewed scientific evidence supports this hypothesis,” the scientists noted.

Dr. Wertheim has helped collect some of that peer-reviewed scientific evidence. The new study adds more evidence in favor of an animal origin, he said.

If SARS-CoV-2 was reared in a lab, its mutations would unfold in a pattern like that of the Russian flu. Instead, Dr. Wertheim and his colleagues found, its mutation pattern matched the five naturally occurring outbreaks they studied.

Instead, Dr. Wertheim said, Covid appears to have arisen from some really bad luck. As the precursor virus was adapting to infect bats, it ended up ready to start a pandemic among people. “It’s coincidentally exceptionally good at being a human virus,” Dr. Wertheim said.

David Robertson, a virologist at the University of Glasgow who was not involved in the new research, said that the study offered insights not just for Covid but for any zoonotic virus — a virus that spreads from animals to humans. “It’s a key point for understanding zoonotic risk,” he said. “Viruses can be circulating in nature without requiring adaptations to infect or transmit successfully in humans.”

If that’s the case across a wide range of zoonotic viruses, Dr. Wertheim said, we can expect more pandemics in the future. “It’s what we don’t know that’s going to get us,” he said. “They’re out there, and they’re ready to go.”

Translation

科學家窺見新疫情的起源（2/2）

研究人員開發出一種新工具，用於區分由自然發生的病毒爆發疫情和由實驗室事故導致的爆發

（繼續）

此後，研究人員尚未找到直接證據來驗證此假設或其他類似假設。但Wertheim博士及其同事的一項新研究得出結論：1977年的病毒在大流行之前經歷了某種奇特的進化 - 而且它獲得的突變模式與實驗室培養的病毒的突變模式完全相同。

約翰霍普金斯大學的生物安全專家Gigi Gronvall表示，這項新研究表明，1977年的疫情始於一次疫苗試驗。 她說:「這進一步證明，他們當時試圖研發減毒疫苗，結果卻慘敗了」。

並未參與這項新研究的東京大學病毒學家Spyros Lytras表示，該研究的方法為追蹤疫情起源提供了一種新工具。他說: 「基因數據包含一個可靠的訊號，可以區分實驗室傳代和人為操作，相對於自然溢出」。

加州大學洛杉磯分校疾病生態學家James Lloyd-Smith表示，在俄羅斯流感中檢測到實驗室進化的基因特徵是「非常酷」的事。但他提醒說，科學家通常只能捕捉到病毒樣本中演化過程的一小部分。他說: 「這種方法並非萬能，這項研究仍然面臨著數據有限的挑戰，而數據有限一直是該領域長期存在的難題」。

在Wertheim博士及其同事分析的幾宗疫情中，只有俄羅斯流感被證明是例外。導致新冠肺炎的病毒—SARS-CoV-2—則不是。

研究人員發現，SARS-CoV-2 在感染人類之前並沒有發生任何異常變化。它像其他蝙蝠冠狀病毒一樣，在蝙蝠間傳播的過程中不斷發生變異；只有在病毒出現在人類身上之後，才出現了顯著的變化。不到一年，全新的變種病毒就不斷湧現，這些變異使其能夠完美地適應人類。

這項新研究為新冠病毒起源的持續爭論增添了新的內容。美國國立衛生研究院院長Jay Bhattacharya博士在1月接受《紐約時報》採訪時斷言，SARS-CoV-2 源自於實驗室。他說: 「我認為，如果只看科學證據，我會說這是肯定的」。

一些支持實驗室洩漏起源論的專家指出，SARS-CoV-2 從疫情爆發之初就充份预備好在人群中傳播。去年11月，美國疾病管制與預防中心前主任Robert Redfield博士聲稱，中國軍方發展了SARS-CoV-2病毒作為吸入式疫苗。Redfield博士在一次播客採訪中說道: 「我認為這一切都是設計出來的」。

但上個月，世界衛生組織指派的一個專家小組對新冠病毒的起源進行了調查，最終得出結論：SARS-CoV-2病毒起源於蝙蝠，然後蝙蝠將其傳播給了武漢一家市場出售的動物。

科學家指出:「大多數經過同行評審的科學證據都支持這個假設」。

Wertheim博士曾參與那個收集一部分曾經過同儕審查的科學證據。他表示，這項新研究為病毒起源於動物的觀點提供了更多證據。

如果SARS-CoV-2病毒是在實驗室中培育的，那麼它的變異模式應該類似於俄羅斯流感病毒。然而，Wertheim博士及其同事發現，它的變異模式與他們研究的五宗自然發生的疫情相吻合。

Wertheim博士表示，新冠病毒的出現似乎純粹是運氣不佳。其前身病毒在適應感染蝙蝠的過程中，最終卻意外地具備了在人類中引發大流行的能力。 Wertheim博士說: 「它巧合地非常擅長成為一種人類病毒」。

並未參與這項新研究的格拉斯哥大學的病毒學家David Robertson，他表示，這項研究不僅為新冠病毒，也為所有人畜共通病毒 - 即從動物傳播給人類的病毒 - 提供了新的見解。 “這是理解人畜共患風險的關鍵，”他說道:“病毒可以在自然界中傳播，而無需進行適應性改造就能成功感染或傳播給人類。”

Wertheim博士表示，如果這種情況普遍存在於多種人畜共通病毒中，那麼未來我們可能會面臨更多疫情。 他說道:「讓我們陷入困境的，是我們不知道的事」，「它們就在那裡，隨時準備爆發」。

So, a new study finds that Covid is pretty ordinary. Scientists have compared seven viral outbreaks that occurred in recent decades. For the most part, the researchers find that the outbreaks have not been preceded by any unusual genetic changes in the viruses. In all but one case, in 1977, the viruses circulated in animals and gained the ability to spread to and among people. Covid appears to have arisen from some really bad luck of human. Apparently, we can expect more pandemics in the future. 

科學家窺見新疫情的起源（1/2）

Recently the New York Times reported the following:

Scientists Get a Glimpse of How New Pandemics Are Made (1/2)

Researchers have devised a new tool for discerning between naturally occurring viral outbreaks and those resulting from lab accidents.

The NYT - By Carl Zimmer

March 9, 2026

Updated 9:43 a.m. ET

The Covid pandemic was an extraordinary moment in history. Starting at the end of 2019, a virus new to science swept across the planet, killed more than 25 million people and caused trillion of dollars in economic damage.

But as outbreaks go, Covid was pretty ordinary, a new study finds.

Scientists compared seven viral outbreaks that occurred in recent decades, including epidemics of Covid, Ebola and influenza. For the most part, the researchers found, the outbreaks were not preceded by any unusual genetic changes in the viruses. In all but one case, in 1977, the viruses circulated in animals and gained the ability to spread to and among people only by unfortunate coincidence.

“We see that time and again,” said Joel Wertheim, a virologist at the University of California San Diego. He and his colleagues published the study on Friday in the journal Cell.

Dr. Wertheim and his colleagues reconstructed the evolutionary history of these viruses by looking at their genes. They tracked how viruses gained different kinds of mutations before causing outbreaks and looked at that pattern after the viruses jumped into the human population.

In one line of research, the scientists examined the influenza pandemic of 2009. In that year, a new strain of influenza emerged in North America and went on to infect one-quarter of all people on Earth and kill 230,000.

Other studies of the virus have revealed that it came from pigs, where influenza viruses gain mutations on a regular basis. Some mutations made it harder for the viruses to spread to other pigs. Others provided an evolutionary edge; still others had no effect.

The viral strain that jumped into humans in 2009 had split off as its own evolutionary branch at least a decade earlier. Until it reached humans, its evolution looked ordinary; the pattern of mutations gained and lost by the virus resembled what scientists would expect to see in any flu virus thriving in pigs.

Only after the virus jumped to humans did things change, and dramatically.

After infecting humans in 2009, the flu virus gained many new mutations. In pigs, those mutations would probably have hindered the virus’s ability to multiply and caused it to be outcompeted by other viruses infecting the animals.

But once the virus settled in a new host, those old constraints were gone. It began adapting to spread more successfully in humans.

Dr. Wertheim and his colleagues ran the same analysis on other outbreaks, including the Ebola epidemic that swept across West Africa in 2013 and is thought to have originated in a bat, and the 2022 outbreak of mpox, a virus that causes painful blisters and is believed to be harbored by African squirrels. Again and again, the researchers saw the same pattern: The viruses that eventually jumped into humans did not evolve in an unusual way beforehand but did change dramatically afterward.

“Once it gets into humans, it’s a new day,” Dr. Wertheim said.

But one virus turned out to be a major exception to that rule, the new study found. Its unique mutations suggest that it may have been set loose by a scientific accident.

In 1977, the world was hit by a pandemic that came to be known as Russian flu, because the first cases were reported by the Soviet Union. Scientists were baffled by the virus: Its closest relatives were not in pigs or other animals but instead looked a lot like viruses that were circulating in the early 1950s, a quarter-century earlier.

Some scientists speculated that the Russian flu was not a spillover from a pig or a bird. Rather, they suggested, it had emerged from a scientific mishap, perhaps a vaccine trial that had gone wrong in the Soviet Union or China.

The vaccine makers might have used a common technique that involved producing a vaccine made of weakened viruses. Viruses growing in Petri dishes in a lab accumulate mutations that would harm them if they were infecting a person. Scientists speculated that Soviet or Chinese scientists thawed out some old flu virus to make a weakened vaccine but used faulty techniques that allowed the virus to spread from person to person.

(to be continued)

Translation

科學家窺見新疫情的起源（1/2）

研究人員開發出一種新工具，用於區分由自然發生的病毒爆發疫情和由實驗室事故導致的爆發

新冠疫情是歷史上一個非同尋常的時刻。從2019年底開始，一種科學界先前未知的病毒席捲全球，造成超過2,500萬人死亡，並造成數兆美元的經濟損失。

但一項新的研究發現，就疫情爆發而言，新冠疫情其實相當普通。

科學家比較了近幾十年來發生的七次病毒爆發，包括新冠疫情、伊波拉疫情和流感疫情。研究人員發現，在大多數情況下，這些疫情爆發之前病毒並沒有發生任何異常的基因變化。除了1977年的那次例外，所有病毒都是在動物中傳播，並因不幸的巧合而獲得了在人與人之間傳播的能力。

加州大學聖地牙哥分校的病毒學家Joel Wertheim說:「我們一次又一次地看到這種情況」。他和他的同事於週五在《細胞》（Cell）雜誌上發表了這項研究。

Wertheim博士和他的同事透過分析病毒的基因，重建了這些病毒的演化史。他們追蹤了病毒在引發疫情之前如何獲得不同類型的突變，並研究了病毒進入人類群體後這種突變模式的變化。

在其中一項研究中，科學家檢視了2009年的流感大流行。那一年，一種新的流感病毒株在北美出現，並感染了全球四分之一的人口，造成23萬人死亡。

其他針對病毒的研究表明它來自豬，而流感病毒在豬體內經常發生突變。有些突變使病毒更難傳播給其他豬。有些突變則賦予了病毒進化優勢；有些突變則沒有產生任何影響。

2009年感染人類的病毒株至少在十年前就已經分化成一個獨立的演化分支。在感染人類之前，它的進化過程看起來很普通；病毒獲得的突變和缺失的模式與科學家預期在豬群中傳播的任何流感病毒的模式相似。

只有在病毒感染人類之後，情況才發生了劇烈的變化。

流感病毒在2009年感染人類後，獲得了許多新的突變。在豬群中，這些突變可能會阻礙病毒的繁殖能力，並使其在去感染其他動物的病毒競爭中敗下陣來。

但是，一旦病毒在新宿主中定居下來，這些原有的限制就消失了。它開始適應環境，從而更容易在人類中傳播。

Wertheim博士及其同事對其他疫情進行了同樣的分析，包括2013年席捲西非的伊波拉疫情（相信起源於蝙蝠）以及2022年的麻疹病毒疫情（一種會導致疼痛水皰的病毒，相信由非洲松鼠攜帶）。研究人員一次又一次地觀察到相同的模式：最終傳播到人類的病毒在傳播前並沒有異常的演化，但在傳播後卻發生了顯著的變化。

Wertheim博士說: 「一旦病毒進入人類體內，那就是嶄新的一天」。

但新的研究發現，有一種病毒是這個規則的主要例外。其獨特的突變表明，它可能是由科學事故釋放出來的。

1977年，一場被稱為「俄羅斯流感」的全球性流行病席捲全球，因為首批病例是由蘇聯報告的。科學家對這種病毒感到困惑：它的近親並非來自豬或其他動物，而是與25年前，也就是20世紀50年代初期流行的病毒非常相似。

一些科學家推測，俄羅斯流感並非源自豬或禽類。他們認為，它可能是科學事故的產物，例如蘇聯或中國疫苗試驗中出現的失誤。

疫苗生產商可能採用了一種常見的技術，即用減弱病毒去製造疫苗。在實驗室培養皿中培養的病毒會累積突變，如果它感染人類，這些變異會對病毒造成傷害。科學家推測，蘇聯或中國的科學家解凍了某種舊的流感病毒來製造減弱病毒疫苗，但由於使用了錯誤的技術，導致病毒在人與人之間傳播。

（待續）

"Chinese laboratory may be source of COVID-19" - US White House new website

 Recently NHK News on-line reported the following:

“新型コロナ発生源 中国研究所か” 米ホワイトハウス 新サイト

2025年4月19日 11時43分

アメリカのホワイトハウスは、新型コロナウイルスの発生源をめぐり、中国の研究所から流出した可能性を強調する新たなウェブサイトを公開しました。

ホワイトハウスが18日に公開したウェブサイトは「研究所からの流出・コロナウイルスの真の発生源」と題したもので、あわせてトランプ大統領の写真も掲載されています。

この中で「コロナウイルスは自然界には存在しない特徴を持っている」とか、「中国の武漢にある研究所では不十分な安全レベルで研究を行っていたことがある」などと記載しているほか、武漢の衛星写真を掲載し「研究所に関係した事故が発生源である可能性がもっとも高い」と強調しています。

また、感染予防として、マスクの着用が有効だという決定的な証拠はないとも主張しています。

アメリカのメディアは、これまで新型コロナウイルスの検査やワクチンに関する情報が掲載されていた政府のサイトにアクセスしようとすると、このページが表示されるようになったと伝えています。

ホワイトハウスは、議会下院の新型コロナウイルスに関する委員会がまとめた報告書から情報を引用したとしていますが、有力紙ワシントン・ポストなどは議会の報告書は、共和党が主導して作成したものだと指摘しているほか、発生源については、情報機関や専門家の見方も一致していないと伝えています。

Translation

"Chinese laboratory may be source of COVID-19" - US White House new website

The US White House had launched a new website about the source of the new coronavirus and emphasized the possibility that it might have leaked from a Chinese laboratory.

The website released by the White House on the 18th was entitled "Laboratory Leaks: The True Origin of the Coronavirus" and also features a photo of President Trump.

It stated that "coronaviruses have characteristics that do not exist in nature" and that "research has been conducted at a laboratory in Wuhan in China with an insufficient level of safety," and also posted satellite photos of Wuhan, emphasizing that "the most likely source is an accident related to a laboratory."

It also claimed that there was no conclusive evidence that wearing masks was effective in preventing infection.

US media reported that this page was now displayed when trying to access government sites that previously contained information on COVID-19 testing and vaccines.

The White House said it cited information from a report compiled by the House of Representatives Committee on the New Coronavirus, but leading newspapers such as the Washington Post had pointed out that the congressional report was led by Republicans, and that there was no consensus among intelligence agencies and experts regarding the source of the outbreak.

So, the US White House has launched a new website about the source of the new coronavirus and emphasized the possibility that it may have leaked from a Chinese laboratory. I am wondering why Trump did this at this moment.

不友善：對 COVID-19 起源的探索如何變得政治上非常不愉快(3/3)

Recently Yahoo News on-line reported the following:

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous (3/3)

Associated Press - DAKE KANG and MARIA CHENG

Updated Mon, April 22, 2024 at 6:09 a.m. PDT·14 min read

(continue)

As criticism of China grew, the Chinese government deflected blame. Instead of firing health officials, they declared their virus response a success and closed investigations into the officials with few job losses.

“There were no real reforms, because doing reforms means admitting fault,” said a public health expert in contact with Chinese health officials who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter.

In late February 2020, the internationally respected doctor Zhong Nanshan appeared at a news conference and said that “the epidemic first appeared in China, but it did not necessarily originate in China.”

Days later, Chinese leader Xi ordered new controls on virus research. A leaked directive from China’s Publicity Department ordered media not to report on the virus origins without permission, and a public WeChat account reposted an essay claiming the U.S. military created COVID-19 at a Fort Detrick lab and spread it to China during a 2019 athletic competition in Wuhan. Days later, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson repeated the accusation.

The false claims enraged U.S. President Donald Trump, who began publicly blaming China for the outbreak, calling COVID-19 “the China virus” and the “kung-flu.”

Chinese officials told WHO that blood tests on lab workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were negative, suggesting they hadn’t been previously infected with bat coronaviruses. But when WHO pressed for an independent audit, Chinese officials balked and demanded WHO investigate the U.S. and other countries as well.

By blaming the U.S., Beijing diverted blame. It was effective in China, where many Chinese were upset by racially charged criticism. But outside China, it fueled speculation of a lab leak coverup.

By the time WHO led another visit to Wuhan in January 2021, a year into the pandemic, the atmosphere was toxic.

Liang, the Chinese health official in charge of two earlier WHO visits, continued to promote the questionable theory that the virus was shipped into China on frozen food. He suppressed information suggesting it could have come from animals at the Wuhan market, organizing market workers to tell WHO experts no live wildlife was sold and cutting recent photos of wildlife at the market from the final report. There was heavy political scrutiny, with numerous Chinese officials who weren’t scientists or health officers present at meetings.

Despite a lack of direct access, the WHO team concluded that a lab leak was “extremely unlikely.” So it came as an infuriating surprise to Chinese officials when, months later, WHO chief Tedros said that it was “premature” to rule out the lab leak theory, saying such lab accidents were “common,” and pressed China to be more transparent.

China told WHO any future missions to find COVID-19 origins should be elsewhere, according to a letter obtained by AP. Since then, global cooperation on the issue has ground to a halt; an independent group convened by WHO to investigate the origins of COVID-19 in 2021 has been stymied by the lack of cooperation from China and other issues.

Chinese scientists are still under heavy pressure, according to 10 researchers and health officials. Researchers who published papers on the coronavirus ran into trouble with Chinese authorities. Others were barred from travel abroad for conferences and WHO meetings. Gao, the then-director of the China CDC, was investigated after U.S. President Joe Biden ordered a review of COVID-19 data, and again after giving interviews on the virus origins.

New evidence is treated with suspicion. In March 2023, scientists announced that genetic material collected from the market showed raccoon dog DNA mixed with COVID-19 in early 2020, data that WHO said should have been publicly shared years before. The findings were posted, then removed by Chinese researchers with little explanation.

The head of the China CDC Institute of Viral Disease was forced to retire over the release of the market data, according to a former China CDC official who declined to be named to speak on a sensitive topic.

“It has to do with the origins, so they’re still worried,” the former official said. “If you try and get to the bottom of it, what if it turns out to be from China?”

Other scientists note that any animal from which the virus may have originally jumped has long since disappeared.

“There was a chance for China to cooperate with WHO and do some animal sampling studies that might have answered the question,” said Tulane University’s Garry. “The trail to find the source has now gone cold.”

___

Cheng reported from Geneva.

Translation

（繼續）

隨著對中國的批評越來越多，中國政府轉移責任。 他們沒有解僱衛生官員，而是宣布他們的病毒應對措施取得了成功，並結束了對官員的調查，只作出少量解僱。

一位與中國衛生官員有接觸的公共衛生專家表示：「真正的改革沒有發生，因為改革意味著承認錯誤」。由於此事敏感性，專家要求匿名。

2020年2月下旬，國際知名醫生鐘南山出現在記者會上表示，「疫情首先出現在中國，但不一定起源於中國」。

幾天後，中國領導人習近平下令對病毒研究實施新的控制。 中國宣傳部的一份被洩漏被出來指令, 要求媒體未經許可不得報道病毒起源，一個微信公眾號轉發了一篇文章，聲稱美國軍方在 Fort Detrick 實驗室製造了COVID-19，並在2019 年體育比賽期間將其傳播到中國在武漢。 幾天後，中國外交部發言人重申了這項指控。

這些虛假說法激怒了美國總統特朗普，他開始公開指責中國應對疫情爆發負責，稱 COVID-19 為「中國病毒」和「功夫流感」。

中國官員告訴世衛組織，武漢病毒研究所實驗室工作人員的血液檢測呈陰性，顯示他們之前沒有感染過蝙蝠冠狀病毒。 但當世衛組織要求進行獨立審查時，中國官員猶豫不決，並要求世衛組織也對美國和其他國家進行調查。

北京透過指責美國來轉移責任。 這在中國很有效，許多中國人對帶種族歧視的批評感到不安。 但在中國以外，這引發了人們對實驗室洩漏事件被掩蓋的猜測。

2021 年 1 月，即疫情爆發一年後，當世衛組織再次訪問武漢時，那裡的氣紛已經非常不愉快。

負責世衛組織早些時候兩次訪問的姓 Liang 的中國衛生官員繼續宣揚病毒是透過冷凍食品運入中國的不確定理論。 他壓制了有關病毒可能來自武漢市場上的動物的信息，組織市場工作人員告訴世衛組織專家，說沒有出售活體野生動物，並從最終報告中刪除了市場上野生動物的最新照片。 會議受到嚴格的政治審查，許多出席了會議的中國官員都不是科學家或衛生官員。

儘管缺乏直接接觸，世衛組織團隊得出的結論是，實驗室洩漏「極不可能」。 因此，幾個月後，當世界衛生組織總幹事譚德塞表示，現在排除實驗室洩漏理論還 “為時過早” ，稱此類實驗室事故 “很常見” ，並敦促中國提高透明度，這令中國官員感到非常氣憤驚訝。

據美聯社取得的一封信稱，中國告訴世界衛生組織，未來任何尋找 COVID-19 起源的任務都應該在其他地方。 自此之後，全球在這議題上的合作陷入停滯。 世衛組織召集的調查 2021 年 COVID-19 起源的獨立小組，由於缺乏中國的合作和其他問題而受阻。

十名研究人員和衛生官員表示，中國科學家仍面臨巨大壓力。 發表有關冠狀病毒論文的研究人員遇到了中國當局的麻煩。 其他人則被禁止出國參加會議及世衛組織的會議。 在美國總統拜登下令審查 COVID-19 數據後，時任中國疾管中心主任的 Gao 先生受到調查, 他在接受有關病毒起源的採訪後又再次被調查。

新證據受到懷疑。 2023 年 3 月，科學家宣布在 2020 年初從市場收集的遺傳材料顯示貉 DNA與 COVID-19 混合，世衛組織表示這些數據早在幾年前就應該公開分享。 這研究結果被發布，然後被中國研究人員刪除，幾乎沒有任何解釋。

一位不願透露姓名的中國疾病預防控制中心前官員表示，中國疾病預防控制中心病毒病研究所所長因市場數據的發布而被迫退休。

這位前官員說: 「這與起源有關，所以他們仍然擔心」。 「如果你試圖查個水落石出，萬一它是來自中國的話怎麼辦？」

其他科學家指出，任何最初可能傳播病毒的動物早已消失。

杜蘭大學的 Garry說： “中國有機會與世界衛生組織合作，進行一些動物採樣研究，這可能會回答這個問題”; “尋找源頭的路徑現在已經變冷清了。”

So, this report suggests that the hunt for the origins of COVID-19 has gone dark in China. Political infighting has stalled and thwarted attempts to find the source of the virus. This report is written by western journalists drawing on thousands of pages of undisclosed emails and documents and interviews. I hope non-government experts in China can also do a similar report based on their data and from their perspective. This report shows that in China there are three groups of people involved: the CCP party officials, the scientists, and the health officials.

This report also suggests that the matter could have played out differently, as shown by the outbreak of SARS, a genetic relative of COVID-19 happened nearly 20 years ago. At that time China initially tried to hide infections, but WHO complained swiftly and publicly. Ultimately, Beijing fired officials and carried out reforms.

不友善：對 COVID-19 起源的探索如何變得政治上非常不愉快(2/3)

Recently Yahoo News on-line reported the following:

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous (2/3)

Associated Press -DAKE KANG and MARIA CHENG

Updated Mon, April 22, 2024 at 6:09 a.m. PDT·14 min read

(continue)

Another early victim was Zhang Yongzhen, the first scientist to publish a sequence of the virus. A day after he wrote a memo urging health authorities to action, China’s top health official ordered Zhang’s lab closed.

“They used their official power against me and our colleagues,” Zhang wrote in an email provided to AP by Edward Holmes, an Australian virologist.

On Jan. 20, 2020, a WHO delegation arrived in Wuhan for a two-day mission. China did not approve a visit to the market, but they stopped by a China CDC lab to examine infection prevention and control procedures, according to an internal WHO travel report. WHO’s then-China representative, Dr. Gauden Galea, told colleagues in a private meeting that inquiries about COVID-19’s origins went unanswered.

By then, many Chinese were angry at their government. Among Chinese doctors and scientists, the sense grew that Beijing was hunting for someone to blame.

“There are a few cadres who have performed poorly,” Chinese leader Xi Jinping said in unusually harsh comments in February. “Some dare not take responsibility, wait timidly for orders from above, and don’t move without being pushed.”

The government opened investigations into top health officials, according to two former and current China CDC staff and three others familiar with the matter. Health officials were encouraged to report colleagues who mishandled the outbreak to Communist Party disciplinary bodies, according to two of the people.

Some people both inside and outside China speculated about a laboratory leak. Those suspicious included right-wing American politicians, but also researchers close to WHO.

The focus turned to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a high-level lab that experimented with some of the world’s most dangerous viruses.

In early February 2020, some of the West’s leading scientists, headed by Dr. Jeremy Farrar, then at Britain’s Wellcome Trust, and Dr. Anthony Fauci, then director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, banded together to assess the origins of the virus in calls, a Slack channel and emails.

They drafted a paper suggesting a natural evolution, but even among themselves, they could not agree on the likeliest scenario. Some were alarmed by features they thought might indicate tinkering.

“There have (been) suggestions that the virus escaped from the Wuhan lab,” Holmes, the Australian virologist, who believed the virus originated in nature, wrote in a Feb. 7, 2020, email. “I do a lot of work in China, and I can (assure) you that a lot of people there believe they are being lied to.”

American scientists close to researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology warned counterparts there to prepare.

James LeDuc, head of a Texas lab, emailed his Wuhan colleague on Feb. 9, 2020, saying he’d already been approached by U.S. officials. “Clearly addressing this will be essential, with any kind of documentation you might have,” he wrote.

The Chinese government was conducting its own secret investigation into the Wuhan Institute. Gao, the then-head of the China CDC, and another Chinese health expert revealed its existence in interviews months and years later. Both said the investigation found no evidence of wrongdoing, which Holmes, the Australian virologist, also heard from another contact in China. But Gao said even he hadn't seen further details, and some experts suspect they may never be released.

WHO started negotiations with China for a further visit with the virus origins in mind, but it was China’s Foreign Ministry that decided the terms.

Scientists were sidelined and politicians took control. China refused a visa for Ben Embarek, then WHO’s top animal virus expert. The itinerary dropped nearly all items linked to an origins search, according to draft agendas for the trip obtained by the AP. And Gao, the then-head of the China CDC who is also a respected scientist tasked with investigating the origins, was left off the schedule.

Instead, Liang Wannian, a politician in the Communist Party hierarchy, took charge of the international delegation. Liang is an epidemiologist close to top Chinese officials and China's Foreign Ministry who is widely seen as pushing the party line, not science-backed policies, according to nine people familiar with the situation who declined to be identified to speak on a sensitive subject.

Liang ruled in favor of shutting the Wuhan market at the beginning of the outbreak, according to a Chinese media interview with a top China CDC official that was later deleted. Significantly, it was Liang who promoted an implausible theory that the virus came from contaminated frozen food imported into China. Liang did not respond to an emailed request for comment.

Most of the WHO delegation was not allowed to go to Wuhan, which was under lockdown. The few who did learned little. They again had no access to the Wuhan Institute of Virology or the wildlife market and obtained only scant details about China CDC efforts to trace the coronavirus there.

On the train, Liang lobbied the visiting WHO scientists to praise China’s health response in their public report. Dr. Bruce Aylward, a senior adviser to WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, saw it as the “best way to meet China’s need for a strong assessment of its response.”

The new section was so flattering that colleagues emailed Aylward to suggest he “dial it back a bit.”

“It is remarkable how much knowledge about a new virus has been gained in such a short time,” read the final report, which was reviewed by China’s top health official before it went to Tedros.

(to be continued)

Translation

（繼續）

另一位早期受害者是第一個公佈病毒序列的科學家 Zhang Yongzhen。 在他寫了一份備忘錄敦促衛生當局採取行動的第二天，中國最高衛生官員下令關閉 Zhang 的實驗室。

Zhang 在提供給美聯社看的一封給澳洲病毒學家 Edward Holmes的電子郵件中, 曾寫道: 「他們利用官方權力來對付我和我們的同事」。

2020年1月20日，世衛代表團抵達武漢開始為期兩天的訪問。 根據世衛組織內部行程報告，中國並未批准他們訪問該市場，但他們在中國疾病預防控制中心的一個實驗室停留，查看感染預防和控制的程序。 世衛組織時任中國代表 Gauden Galea 博士在一次非公開會議上告訴同事，有關 COVID-19 起源的詢問沒有得到答覆。

那時，許多中國人對他們的政府感到憤怒。 中國醫生和科學家越來越感覺到北京正在尋找某些人來指責。

中國領導人習近平在二月異常嚴厲的評論中說道: 「有少數幹部表現不佳」。 「有的不敢承擔責任，膽怯地等待上級的命令，不被推就不敢動」。

據中國疾病預防控制中心兩名前任和現任工作人員以及其他三名知情人士透露，政府對高級衛生官員展開了調查。 兩名知情人士稱，鼓勵衛生官員向共產黨紀檢機構舉報對疫情處理不當的同事。

中國國內外一些人懷疑實驗室發生洩漏。 持懷疑態度的人包括美國右翼政客，也包括與世衛組織關係密切的研究人員。

焦點轉向了武漢病毒研究所，這是一個對世界上一些最危險的病毒進行實驗的高級實驗室。

2020 年 2 月初，以時任英國 Jeremy Farrar 信託基金會的 Jeremy Farrar 博士和時任美國國立衛生研究院院長 Anthony Fauci 博士為首的一些西方頂尖科學家以電話、在Slack 的頻道和電子郵件聯合起來評估病毒的起源。

他們起草了一篇提出自然演化的一個理論，但即使在他們內部，他們也無法就最可能的情況達成一致。 有些人對一些跡象有可能顯示出有事情被改動感到震驚。

相信該病毒起源於自然界的澳洲病毒學家 Holmes 在 2020 年 2 月 7 日的一封電子郵件中寫道: 「有跡象表明該病毒是從武漢實驗室逃脫的」。 「我在中國做了很多工作，我可以向你保證，那裡有很多人相信他們被欺騙了」。

與武漢病毒研究所研究人員關係密切的美國科學家提醒那裡的同行做好準備。

德州一家實驗室負責人 James LeDuc 於 2020 年 2 月 9 日向他的武漢同事發送電子郵件，稱美國官員已經與他聯繫。 他寫道: 「要去明確地解決這個問題是至關重, 無論你有什麼類型的文檔在手上」。

中國政府正在對武漢研究所進行秘密調查。 時任中國疾病預防控制中心主任 Gao 先生和另一位中國衛生專家在數月和數年後的訪談中透露了調查的存在。 兩人都表示，調查沒有發現任何不當行為的證據，澳洲病毒學家 Holmes 也從中國的另一位聯絡人聽到了這一點。 但 Gao 說，即使他還沒有看到進一步細節，一些專家懷疑這些細節可能永遠不會被公佈。

考慮到病毒的起源，世衛組織開始與中國就進一步訪問進行談判，但最終決定條件的是中國外交部。

科學家被邊緣化，政客掌控了局面。 中國拒絕了當時世界衛生組織首席動物病毒專家 Ben Embarek 的簽證。 根據美聯社取得的行程草案，行程中幾乎刪除了所有與出發地搜尋相關的項目。 時任中國疾病預防控制中心主任 Gao 先生也是一位受人尊敬的科學家，負責調查病毒的起源，但他沒有被列入行程表。

相反，由共產黨架構中的政客 Liang Wannian 負責國際代表團。 據九位以話題敏感為由不願透露姓名的知情人士透露，Liang 是一位與中國高級官員和中國外交部關係密切的流行病學家，人們普遍認為他在推行黨的路線，而不是推行有科學支持的政策。

根據中國媒體對中國疾病預防控制中心一名高級官員的採訪報道，Liang 在疫情爆發之初就裁定支持關閉武漢市場，該採訪後來被刪除。 值得注意的是，Liang 提出了一個令人難以置信的理論，即該病毒來自進口到中國的受污染的冷凍食品。 Liang 沒有回覆透過電子郵件發送的置評請求。

世衛代表團的大部分成員均不被允許前往已處於封鎖狀態的武漢。 少數可以這樣做的人獲知到的東西很少。 他們再次無法進入武漢病毒研究所或野生動物市場，僅獲得了有關中國疾病預防控制中心在當地追蹤冠狀病毒的些少資訊。

在火車上，Liang 遊說來訪的世界衛生組織科學家在公開報告中讚揚中國的衛生應對措施。 世衛組織總幹事譚德塞的高級顧問 Dr. Bruce Aylward 認為，這是「最佳方式去滿足中國需要就其對應對方法得到有力的評估」。

報告新加部分非常阿諛奉承，以至於同事們給 Aylward 發電子郵件建議他「稍微調低一點」。

最終報告中寫道：「在如此短的時間內獲得了關於一種新病毒的如此多的知識，真是太了不起了」。該報告在交給譚德塞之前經過了中國最高衛生官員的審查。

（待續）

Note:

Slack is a messaging app for business that connects people to the information they need. By bringing people together to work as one unified team, Slack transforms the way organizations communicate. Slack organizes conversations into dedicated spaces called channels. With channels, you can assemble the right people in one space and organize around a common goal.

不友善：對 COVID-19 起源的探索如何變得政治上非常不愉快 (1/3)

Recently Yahoo News on-line reported the following:

Toxic: How the search for the origins of COVID-19 turned politically poisonous (1/3)

Associated Press - DAKE KANG and MARIA CHENG

Updated Mon, April 22, 2024 at 6:09 a.m. PDT·14 min read

BEIJING (AP) — The hunt for the origins of COVID-19 has gone dark in China, the victim of political infighting after a series of stalled and thwarted attempts to find the source of the virus that killed millions and paralyzed the world for months.

The Chinese government froze meaningful domestic and international efforts to trace the virus from the first weeks of the outbreak, despite statements supporting open scientific inquiry, an Associated Press investigation found. That pattern continues to this day, with labs closed, collaborations shattered, foreign scientists forced out and Chinese researchers barred from leaving the country.

The investigation drew on thousands of pages of undisclosed emails and documents and dozens of interviews that showed the freeze began far earlier than previously known and involved political and scientific infighting in China as much as international finger-pointing.

As early as Jan. 6, 2020, health officials in Beijing closed the lab of a Chinese scientist who sequenced the virus and barred researchers from working with him.

Scientists warn the willful blindness over coronavirus’ origins leaves the world vulnerable to another outbreak, potentially undermining pandemic treaty talks coordinated by the World Health Organization set to culminate in May.

At the heart of the question is whether the virus jumped from an animal or came from a laboratory accident. A U.S. intelligence analysis says there is insufficient evidence to prove either theory, but the debate has further tainted relations between the U.S. and China.

Unlike in the U.S., there is virtually no public debate in China about whether the virus came from nature or from a lab leak. In fact, there is little public discussion at all about the source of the disease, first detected in the central city of Wuhan.

Crucial initial efforts were hampered by bureaucrats in Wuhan trying to avoid blame who misled the central government; the central government, which muzzled Chinese scientists and subjected visiting WHO officials to stage-managed tours; and the U.N. health agency itself, which may have compromised early opportunities to gather critical information in hopes that by placating China, scientists could gain more access, according to internal materials obtained by AP.

In a faxed statement, China's Foreign Ministry defended China’s handling of research into the origins, saying the country is open and transparent, shared data and research, and “made the greatest contribution to global origins research.” The National Health Commission, China's top medical authority, said the country “invested huge manpower, material and financial resources” and “has not stopped looking for the origins of the coronavirus.”

It could have played out differently, as shown by the outbreak of SARS, a genetic relative of COVID-19, nearly 20 years ago. China initially hid infections then, but WHO complained swiftly and publicly. Ultimately, Beijing fired officials and made reforms. The U.N. agency soon found SARS likely jumped to humans from civet cats in southern China and international scientists later collaborated with their Chinese counterparts to pin down bats as SARS’ natural reservoir.

But different leaders of both China and WHO, China’s quest for control of its researchers, and global tensions have all led to silence when it comes to searching for COVID-19’s origins. Governments in Asia are pressuring scientists not to look for the virus for fear it could be traced inside their borders.

Even without those complications, experts say identifying how outbreaks begin is incredibly challenging and that it’s rare to know with certainty how some viruses begin spreading.

“It’s disturbing how quickly the search for the origins of (COVID-19) escalated into politics,” said Mark Woolhouse, a University of Edinburgh outbreak expert. “Now this question may never be definitively answered.”

CLOUDS OF SECRECY

Secrecy clouds the beginning of the outbreak. Even the date when Chinese authorities first started searching for the origins is unclear.

The first publicly known search for the virus took place on Dec. 31, 2019, when Chinese Center for Disease Control scientists visited the Wuhan market where many early COVID-19 cases surfaced.

However, WHO officials heard of an earlier inspection of the market on Dec. 25, 2019, according to a recording of a confidential WHO meeting provided to AP by an attendee. Such a probe has never been mentioned publicly by either Chinese authorities or WHO.

In the recording, WHO’s top animal virus expert, Peter Ben Embarek, mentioned the earlier date, describing it as “an interesting detail.” He told colleagues that officials were “looking at what was on sale in the market, whether all the vendors have licenses (and) if there was any illegal (wildlife) trade happening in the market.”

A colleague asked Ben Embarek, who is no longer with WHO, if that seemed unusual. He responded that “it was not routine,” and that the Chinese “must have had some reason” to investigate the market. “We’ll try to figure out what happened and why they did that.”

Ben Embarek declined to comment. Another WHO staffer at the Geneva meeting in late January 2020 confirmed Ben Embarek’s comments.

The Associated Press could not confirm the search independently. It remains a mystery if it took place, what inspectors discovered, or whether they sampled live animals that might point to how COVID-19 emerged.

A Dec. 25, 2019, inspection would have come when Wuhan authorities were aware of the mysterious disease. The day before, a local doctor sent a sample from an ill market vendor to get sequenced that turned out to contain COVID-19. Chatter about the unknown pneumonia was spreading in Wuhan’s medical circles, according to one doctor and a relative of another who declined to be identified, fearing repercussions.

A scientist in China when the outbreak occurred said they heard of a Dec. 25 inspection from collaborating virologists in the country. They declined to be named out of fear of retribution.

WHO said in an email that it was “not aware” of the Dec. 25 investigation. It is not included in the U.N. health agency’s official COVID-19 timeline.

When China CDC researchers from Beijing arrived on Jan. 1 to collect samples at the market, it had been ordered shut and was already being disinfected, destroying critical information about the virus. Gao Fu, then head of the China CDC, mentioned it to an American collaborator.

“His complaint when I met him was that all the animals were gone,” said Columbia University epidemiologist Ian Lipkin.

Robert Garry, who studies viruses at Tulane University, said a Dec. 25 probe would be “hugely significant,” given what is known about the virus and its spread.

“Being able to swab it directly from the animal itself would be pretty convincing and nobody would be arguing” about the origins of COVID-19, he said.

But perhaps local officials simply feared for their jobs, with memories of firings after the 2003 SARS outbreak still vivid, said Ray Yip, the founding head of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention outpost in China.

“They were trying to save their skin, hide the evidence,” Yip said.

The Wuhan government did not respond to a faxed request for comment.

(to be continued)

Translation

北京（美聯社) - 在中國，對COVID-19起源的追尋已經陷入黑暗，在一系列尋找病毒來源的嘗試停滯不前和受挫之後, 追尋起源在中國成為政治內訌的受害者，這病毒導致数百万人死亡並令世界癱瘓數月。

美聯社的一項調查發現，儘管中國政府發表聲明支持公開科學調查，但從疫情爆發的第一周起，中國政府就凍結了有意義的國內和國際追蹤病毒的努力。 這種模式一直持續到今天，實驗室被關閉，合作破裂，外國科學家被迫離開，中國研究人員被禁止離開中國。

這項調查利用了數千頁未公開的電子郵件和文件以及數十次採訪，這些採訪顯示凍結開始的時間比之前所知的要早得多，並且涉及中國的政治和科學內訌以及國際指責。

早在2020年1月6日，北京衛生官員就把一名對病毒進行定序的中國科學家的實驗室關閉，並禁止研究人員與他合作。

科學家警告說，對冠狀病毒起源的故意忽視使世界很容易再次爆發疫情，這可能會破壞世界衛生組織協調的大流行病條約談判，該談判定於五月得出最終結果。

問題的核心在於，該病毒是從動物身上傳播的還是來自實驗室事故。 美國情報分析稱，沒有足夠的證據證明這兩種理論，但這場辯論進一步損害了中美關係。

與美國不同，中國幾乎沒有關於該病毒是來自自然還是實驗室洩漏的公開辯論。 事實上，公眾對這種疾病的來源幾乎沒有任何討論，這種疾病首先在中部城市武漢發現。

最初的關鍵性努力因武漢官僚試圖避免被指責而去誤導中央政府而受阻; 中央政府壓制了中國科學家的言論去對來訪的世界衛生組織官員進行了有預早鋪排的參觀； 美聯社取得的內部資料顯示，聯合國衛生機構本身，為希望透過安撫中國讓科學家而獲得更多資訊, 可能已經損害了收集關鍵資訊的早期機會。

中國外交部在一份傳真聲明中為中國處理起源研究的方式進行了辯護，稱中國開放透明，共享數據和研究，「為全球起源研究做出了最大貢獻」。 中國最高醫療機構國家衛生健康委員會表示，中國 「投入了大量人力、物力和財力」， 「沒有停止尋找冠狀病毒的起源」 。

正如近 20 年前爆發的 SARS（COVID-19 的遺傳學學親戚）所表明的那樣，情況的發展可能會有所不同。 那次中國最初隱瞞了感染病例，但世衛組織迅速公開抱怨。 最終，北京解雇了官員並進行了改革。 聯合國機構很快發現SARS很可能是從中國南方的果子狸傳染給人類的，國際科學家後來與中國同行合作確定蝙蝠是SARS的天然宿主。

但中國和世界衛生組織的不同領導人、中國尋求控制其研究人員, 以及全球緊張局勢都導致在尋找 COVID-19 起源時導致沉默。 亞洲各國政府正在向科學家施壓，要求他們不要尋找這種病毒，因為擔心病毒可能在亞洲境內被追蹤到。

專家表示，即使沒有這些複雜因素，去確定疫情是如何開始的也是非常具有挑戰性的，而且很難確切地知道某些病毒是如何開始傳播的。

愛丁堡大學疫情專家 Mark Woolhouse 表示： “對 (COVID-19) 起源的搜尋很快就升級為政治，這令人不安”; “現在這個問題可能永遠不會得到明確的答案。”

保密的雲霧

疫情爆發的開始被保密性遮閉了。 甚至中國當局首次開始尋找起源的日期也不清楚。

首次公開的病毒搜尋發生在 2019 年 12 月 31 日，當日期也不清楚。時中國疾病預防控制中心的科學家造訪了出現許多早期 COVID-19 病例的武漢市場。

然而，根據一位與會者向美聯社提供的世衛組織機密會議記錄，世衛組織官員聽說早前於 2019 年 12 月 25 日對市場進行了檢查。 中國當局或世界衛生組織從未公開提及此類調查。

在錄音中，世衛組織頂級動物病毒專家 Peter Ben Embarek 當提提到了較早的日期，將其描述為「一個有趣的細節」。 他告訴同事，官員們正在 “查看市場上出售的商品，是否所有供應商都有許可證，(以及)市場上是否存在任何非法（野生動物）貿易。”

一位同事詢問已不再在世衛組織工作的 Ben Embarek，這是否顯得異常。 他回答說 “這不是例行公事” ，中國人 “一定有某種理由” 調查市場。 “我們將盡力弄清楚發生了什麼以及他們為什麼這麼做。”

Ben Embarek 拒絕置評。 另一位世衛組織工作人員在 2020 年 1 月下旬的日內瓦會議上證實了 Ben Embarek 的評論。

美聯社無法獨立確認25 日對市場進行的這次檢查這。 它是否發生過、檢查人員發現了什麼、或他們是否對活體動物進行了採樣，去指出 COVID-19 會是如何出現的，這仍然是一個謎。

當武漢當局意識到這種神秘疾病時，在2019年12月25日的檢查一定會發生。一天前，一名當地醫生把取自一位患病的市場小販的一份樣本送來進行測序，結果發現樣本含有 COVID-19。 一名醫生和另一名醫生的親屬 (由於擔心造成影響，他拒絕透露姓名) 表示，有關不明肺炎的討論正在武漢醫學界蔓延。 

疫情爆發時，一名在中國的科學家表示，他們從國內一些有合作的病毒學家聽說在 12 月 25 日有調查。 由於擔心遭到報復，他們拒絕透露自己姓名。

世衛組織在一封電子郵件中表示，它「不察覺到」12 月 25 日的調查。 它不包含在聯合國衛生機構的官方 COVID-19 時間線中。

1月1日，當中國疾控中心的研究人員從北京到達該市場採集樣本時，該市場已被勒令關閉，並且已經進行了消毒，銷毀了有關該病毒的重要資訊。 時任中國疾病預防控制中心主任 Gao Fu 向一位美國合作人仕提到了這一點。

哥倫比亞大學流行病學家 Ian Lipkin 說: 「當我見到他時，他抱怨說所有的動物都消失了」。

Tulane大學病毒研究人員 Robert Garry 表示，基於對該病毒及其傳播的了解，12 月 25 日的調查將「非常重要」。

他說，關於 COVID-19 的起源, 「能夠直接從動物身上採集樣本將非常令人信服，而且沒有人會爭議」。

但美國疾病管制與預防中心駐華前哨站的創始負責人 Ray Yip 表示，也許地方官員只是擔心自己的工作崗位受到影響，2003年非典爆發後被解僱的記憶仍然歷歷在目。

Yip 說: 「他們試圖為了保護自己免於困境，隱藏證據」。

武漢市政府沒有回覆透過傳真發送的置評請求。

（待續）

一名男子注射 217 次冠狀病毒疫苗後發生了什麼

Recently Yahoo News on-line reported the following:

What happened after a man got 217 coronavirus shots

Rachel Pannett, (c) 2024 , The Washington Post

Tue, March 5, 2024 at 9:32 p.m. PST

German researchers have examined a “hyper-vaccinated” man they say received more than 200 coronavirus shots without any noticeable side effects or harm to his immune system.

Their findings, published Monday in the Lancet Infectious Diseases, a medical journal, indicate that coronavirus vaccines have a “good degree of tolerability,” the researchers said, although they noted this was an isolated case of “extraordinary hyper-vaccination.”

The 62-year-old man came to researchers’ attention when German prosecutors opened up a fraud investigation, gathering evidence that he had obtained 130 coronavirus shots in a nine-month period - far more than recommended by health authorities.

“We learned about his case via newspaper articles,” Kilian Schober, one of the study’s authors, said in a statement. “We then contacted him and invited him to undergo various tests. … He was very interested in doing so.”

The man agreed to provide blood samples, including new samples, the results from past blood tests and blood samples that had been frozen in recent years.

The man said he had received 217 vaccinations for “private reasons.” German authorities did not file criminal charges.

Going into the study, the researchers had speculated that having so many shots could cause his immune system to become fatigued. Vaccines create immune memory cells that are on standby, ready to rapidly activate the body’s defenses in the event of an infection.

But in fact, the researchers found that the man had more of these immune cells - known as T-cells - than a control group that had received the standard three-dose vaccine regimen. They also did not detect any fatigue in these cells, which they said were just as effective as those of people who had received a typical number of coronavirus shots.

“Overall, we did not find any indication for a weaker immune response, rather the contrary,” said Katharina Kocher, one of the lead authors of the study.

Even by the 217th vaccination, researchers say the shot still had an effect: The man’s antibodies against the coronavirus “increased significantly as a result.” (Researchers say the man insisted on receiving another shot during the study. They took blood samples, which helped them determine how his immune system was responding.)

The researchers made it clear that despite their findings, they “do not endorse hyper-vaccination as a strategy to enhance adaptive immunity.”

Although they could not find any signs that the man had ever contracted the coronavirus, they said they weren’t able to establish a causal relationship between his “hyper-vaccination regimen” and avoiding infection.

More than 60 million people in Germany have been vaccinated against the coronavirus, and most of them have received several doses.

In the United States, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended last month that people 65 and older get a second dose of a coronavirus vaccine made available in the fall because they are at higher risk for severe disease from the virus.

Uptake since the CDC recommended that people age 5 and older get an updated vaccine has been low - only about 22 percent of those 18 and older have received a dose of an updated vaccine. And only about 42 percent of those 65 and older have received a dose, The Washington Post previously reported.

Translation

德國研究人員對一名「過度接種疫苗」的男子進行了檢查，他們稱該男子接受了 200 多次新冠疫苗注射，並沒有任何明顯的副作用或對其免疫系統造成傷害。

研究人員表示，他們的研究結果週一發表在醫學雜誌《刺針傳染病》上，表明冠狀病毒疫苗具有 “良好的耐受性” ，儘管他們指出這是一個 “異常過度接種” 的個別案例。

當德國檢察官展開一单詐欺調查時，這名 62 歲的男子引起了研究人員的注意，調查收集的證據表明，他在 9 個月內註射了 130 劑新冠疫苗，遠遠超過衛生當局建議的數量。

該研究的作者之一 Kilian Schober 在一份聲明中表示： “我們通過報紙文章知悉他的案件。” “然後我們聯繫了他並邀請他接受各種測試。 ……他對此非常感興趣。”

該男子同意提供血液樣本，包括新樣本、過去血液檢測的結果以及近年來冷凍的血液樣本。

該男子表示，他出於「私人原因」接種了 217 種疫苗。 德國當局沒有提出刑事指控。

在研究中，研究人員推測，注射過多的疫苗可能會導致他的免疫系統疲勞。 疫苗會產生處於待命狀態的免疫記憶細胞，準備在感染時迅速啟動人體的防禦能力。

但事實上，研究人員發現，與接受標準三劑疫苗方案的對照組相比，該男子體內的免疫細胞（稱為 T 細胞）更多。 他們也沒有發現這些細胞有任何疲勞，他們說這與接受典型數量的冠狀病毒注射的人的細胞一樣有效。

該研究的主要作者之一 Katharina Kocher 表示： “總的來說，我們沒有發現任何免疫反應減弱的跡象，恰恰是相反。”

研究人員表示，即使接種了第 217 次疫苗，注射仍然有效：該男子的冠狀病毒抗體「因此顯著增加」。 （研究人員表示，該男子在研究期間堅持要再注射一次。他們採集了血液樣本，這有助於他們確定他的免疫系統是如何反應。）

研究人員明確表示，儘管有他們的發現，但他們「並不認可過度接種疫苗作為增強適應性免疫的策略」。

儘管他們沒有發現該男子曾經感染過冠狀病毒的任何跡象，但表示無法在他的「過度疫苗接種方案」和未受感染之間建立因果關係。

德國已有超過 6,000 萬人接種了冠狀病毒疫苗，其中大多數人已經接種了幾劑。

在美國，疾病管制與預防中心上個月建議 65 歲及以上的人接種秋季推出的第二劑冠狀病毒疫苗，因為他們會因該病毒而患嚴重疾病的風險較高。

自 CDC 建議 5 歲及以上人群接種更新疫苗以來，接種率一直很低 - 18 歲及以上人群中只有約 22% 接種了一劑更新疫苗。 根據《華盛頓郵報》先前報道，65 歲及以上的老年人中只有約 42% 接種過疫苗。

              So, a case report indicates that coronavirus vaccines have a “good degree of tolerability” as a “hyper-vaccinated” man who has received more than 200 coronavirus shots still without any noticeable side effects or harm to his immune system. It seems that we now know more about our immune system.

Note:

The Lancet (刺針雜誌) is a weekly peer-reviewed general medical journal and one of the oldest of its kind. It was founded in 1823 by Thomas Wakley, an English surgeon who named it after the surgical instrument called a lancet (scalpel). The journal publishes original research articles, review articles ("seminars" and "reviews"), editorials, book reviews, correspondence, as well as news features and case reports. The Lancet also publishes several specialty journals: The Lancet Neurology (neurology), The Lancet Oncology (oncology), The Lancet Infectious Diseases (infectious diseases), The Lancet Respiratory Medicine (respiratory medicine), The Lancet Psychiatry (psychiatry), The Lancet Diabetes and Endocrinology (endocrinology), and The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology (gastroenterology) all of which publish original research and reviews. (Wikipedia)