COVID-19 as a reprisal from nature on humans was impossible, according to two American experts on Sunday, who said that its rare genome combination could not be found naturally on any coronavirus.

Dr. Steven Quay and Richard Muller said that “damning science” suggests COVID-19 is a product of a souped-up virus experiment. The virus was deliberately modified to reach utmost infectious capacity, in an opinion piece published on the Wall Street Journal Sunday, June 6.

“The most compelling reason to favor the lab leak hypothesis is firmly based in science,” the experts wrote, who pointed to the virus’ rare genome, which proves that it was incubated in a laboratory environment.

Among the 36 sequencing patterns, the SARS-CoV-2 demonstrated the sequencing combination called “CGG-CGG,” or “double CGG,” which the men said has “never been found naturally.”

If the virus were to have evolved naturally, it must adapt to infect the human body through a sequence from cousin viruses that foster the ability, such as SARS or MERS, which are natural respiratory diseases issued from coronavirus. Both the SARS and MERS do not have double CGG in their genome.

Since scientists have never found double CGG in a natural environment, the only explanation is that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered.

“A virus simply cannot pick up a sequence from another virus if that sequence isn’t present in any other virus,” the experts noted.

Talking of the possibility that such an event may still occur naturally, the experts argued: “why the novel coronavirus, when it mutated or recombined, happened to pick its least favorite combination, the double CGG.”

“Yes, it could have happened randomly, through mutations. But do you believe that? At the minimum, this fact—that the coronavirus, with all its random possibilities, took the rare and unnatural combination used by human researchers—implies that the leading theory for the origin of the coronavirus must be laboratory escape,” they sternly stated.

Meanwhile, in gain-of-function research, such combination was, in fact, one of the preferable methods that microbiologists employ to make a virus more infectious or more lethal.

“That’s because it is readily available and convenient, and scientists have a great deal of experience inserting it,” the two men said, adding that the sequence was the superior choice over the other 35 patterns because “it creates a useful beacon that permits the scientists to track the insertion in the laboratory.”

The experts questioned the chance of SARS-CoV-2 learning how to infect humans outside of laboratory intervention.

“Why did it replicate the choice the lab’s gain-of-function researchers would have made?”

Sign up to receive our latest news!


    By submitting this form, I agree to the terms.