166. The Covid Origin Story: Lab Leak or Animal Outbreak? (Ep 1)

Summary

---

The Rest Is Classified, Ep. 166: The Covid Origin Story – Lab Leak or Animal Outbreak? (Part 1)

Podcast: The Rest Is Classified
Hosts: David McClarsky (former CIA analyst/spy novelist), Gordon Corera (veteran security correspondent)
Date: June 14, 2026

Episode Overview

The first episode in a two-part series, "The Covid Origin Story," delves into how the CIA and the wider US intelligence community tried—and struggled—to determine the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic. McClarsky and Corera use their intelligence and journalistic backgrounds to dissect not only the competing scientific hypotheses (lab leak vs. zoonotic outbreak) but also the intense political and diplomatic pressures that colored the investigations. The episode weaves a narrative of uncertainty, secrecy, and the limitations of intelligence agencies when confronted with murky, politically charged, and globally consequential questions.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Framing the Intelligence Challenge (04:00–06:00)

• Intelligence Failures: In intelligence work, it's not always the obvious things that lead to failure, but the overlooked or unresolved details. McClarsky states, "It's the overlooked detail or the flaw nobody quite solved—the kind of vulnerability intelligence services look for." (01:20)
• Limits of Intelligence: The hosts preview that the episode will be about the boundaries of what intelligence agencies can uncover, especially for scientific mysteries.
• Politicization: Corera emphasizes how the question of COVID’s origins quickly became “intensely politicized.” This, coupled with global and White House pressures, created what he calls a “really heady mix.” (04:16)

2. Early Timeline of COVID-19: What Happened? (05:57–09:30)

• Patient Zero: Corera recounts the first mysterious illness clusters in Wuhan, China, around November–December 2019, noting their importance for both scientific and intelligence investigations.
• Seafood Market Connection: McClarsky details how early cases were tied to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, which sold live animals—a potential site for zoonotic transfer.
• First Confirmations:
  • 31 Dec 2019 – China notifies WHO about the cluster.
  • Early Jan 2020 – Chinese scientists identify a new coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2).
  • 11 Jan 2020 – First death in Wuhan.
  • 13 Jan 2020 – First case outside China, in Thailand.
  • March 2020 – WHO declares a pandemic.
• Importance of Knowing the Origin: McClarsky underscores it’s not just academic curiosity: finding the source is critical for pandemic prevention.

3. The Two Theories: Zoonotic Outbreak vs. Lab Leak (09:30–14:30)

• Zoonotic Hypothesis: The initial dominant view was the virus jumped from animals to humans. This was bolstered by quick statements from the scientific community, most notably:
  • The Lancet Statement (Feb 2020): “27 scientists…condemned, quote, conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.” (10:40)
  • Nature Medicine Paper (March 2020): Presents comparative genomic analysis supporting natural origins and becomes “one of the most read scientific papers of its era.” (12:27)
• Lab Leak Hypothesis: Suggestions that the virus escaped from a laboratory—either accidentally or, for a fringe minority, deliberately—were dismissed as conspiracy theories, heavily stigmatized, and even banned on major social platforms.
  • McClarsky: “If you were in the lab leak camp in the early days of the virus, you’re seen as a bit of a nut.” (15:58)

4. The Wuhan Seafood Market & Scientific Consensus (14:30–15:58)

• The Wet Market as Epicenter: Corera describes the market as a “perfect place” for zoonotic transmission, drawing parallels with prior SARS outbreaks.
• Early Consensus & Subsequent Doubts: Despite early agreement, later Freedom of Information disclosures revealed private doubts among scientists, suggesting they privately considered the lab leak plausible even as they publicly dismissed it.

5. Enter the Intelligence Community (21:18–26:09)

• China’s Secrecy: McClarsky highlights the lack of Chinese cooperation, raising suspicions and “making this a relevant question for intelligence agencies.” (21:57)
• ODNI Statement (30 Apr 2020): The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence issues an ambiguous statement upholding that COVID-19 is “not man made or genetically modified” but leaves open both the zoonotic and lab accident scenarios.
  • Corera: “It’s a statement designed to basically say, well, we’re looking at the different possibilities, but it is holding out the possibility of a lab leak… it’s bound to at least elicit more interest in it.” (23:40)
• Trump’s Intervention: Trump publicly claims (hours after the ODNI release) he has “seen classified information” supporting the lab leak theory but refuses to provide evidence, escalating mistrust.
  • “Trump is basically saying that he buys the lab leak angle.” (26:14)

6. The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV): What’s Known and Unknown (26:14–32:51)

• Background:
  • WIV’s history in bat coronavirus research, led by Shi Zhengli (“Batwoman”).
  • Gain-of-function research: Engineering viruses to better understand risks, but with potential dangers.
    • Corera: “This is taking a virus and engineering it in a lab to see if you can make it more infectious… I still find it extraordinary that they do that.” (28:11)
• Safety Concerns:
  • 2018 US Diplomatic Cables warned about insufficiently trained staff and bio-safety weaknesses at the WIV (31:37).
  • Some coronavirus research at WIV was conducted at BSL-2/3, not the highest (BSL-4) safety level.
• Military Links: Collaboration between WIV and the Chinese military/PLA on research projects, adding to suspicions.

7. Competing Hypotheses: Zoonosis, Lab Accident, or Worse? (32:51–34:01)

• Zoonosis: Virus naturally leaks from animal (possibly via wet market).
• Lab Leak:
  • Accidental infection from research samples.
  • Accidental laboratory engineering (e.g. gain-of-function work).
  • Deliberate creation/release (the extreme end—rejected as fringe).
• Coincidence Problem: Both a wet market and the world’s leading bat coronavirus lab in Wuhan.

8. 2021 – The Debate Reignites (34:01–38:01)

• Pandemic Severity: By mid-2021, over 3 million global deaths; origins question becomes even more vital.
• Narrative Shifts:
  • No “host animal” discovered (which would bolster the natural origins case).
  • Chinese regime blocks outside investigations, orders lab samples destroyed, expels journalists.
  • The scientific consensus “starts to break down.”
  • Major articles reopen debate—e.g., Katherine Eban’s Vanity Fair piece and Nicholas Wade’s analysis, citing reputable scientists (Dr. David Baltimore) positing possibly engineered viral features.
  • Most Americans begin to support the lab leak theory in polling (Economist/YouGov, 59% in 2021).
• Surge in US Intelligence Activity: Only after these developments does the intelligence apparatus make this a “top-tier” question—President Biden orders a 90-day intelligence review in spring 2021.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Corera (on the stakes of the question):
  “So much was at stake, so much pressure, and so much uncertainty really created a really heady mix which I think is fascinating for us to look at as The Rest Is Classified.” (04:16)

• McClarsky (on early skepticism):
  “If you were in the lab leak camp in the early days of the virus, you’re seen as a bit of a nut.” (15:58)

• On intelligence limits:
  “This is a story about the limits that intelligence agencies have when they look at those kinds of topics… What happens when there is so much uncertainty over a major intelligence question that the assessments don’t satisfy anybody?” (03:32)

• On the indistinguishable battle lines:
  Corera: “You both have… at the place where the virus emerges, you have both a wet market which is a potential place and you have an institute of virology.” (32:51)

• Gain of function research:
  “I find this gain of function work really interesting and slightly weird… this is kind of trying to do that now—obviously for good scientific defensive reasons… But you can see the risks.” (28:11)

• McClarsky (on Chinese secrecy):
  “Why are the Chinese so insistent that we not find the origins of this pandemic? Right. And given China’s authoritarian politics, there’s this question of, well, if a leak had happened, would the Wuhan Institute of Virology… have even been permitted to talk about it?” (34:01)

• Final setup, Corera:
  “With the [intelligence] sprint underway, let’s stop and next time we’ll look at what an intelligence community can find out about this highly contentious and incredibly world defining issue about the origins of the COVID virus.” (38:37)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Intelligence limitations and scope: 04:00–06:00
• COVID’s early timeline, market link: 05:57–09:30
• Scientific consensus forms, challenges: 09:30–15:58
• Lab leak as conspiracy in early media: 15:58
• Intelligence agencies join the debate: 21:18–26:09
• Details on WIV, bio-safety, gain-of-function: 26:14–32:51
• 2021: Consensus breaks down, major articles, public opinion shift: 34:01–38:01
• Biden orders intelligence review: 38:01–38:37

---

Summary & Flow

David McClarsky and Gordon Corera offer a sharp, insightful journey through the COVID-19 origins debate—how initial scientific consensus rapidly became entwined with politics and secrecy, and how intelligence agencies, hampered by Chinese non-cooperation, were thrust into an impossible mediator role. They chronicle the contested history of the Wuhan outbreak, competing hypotheses (natural zoonotic spillover vs. lab leak), and the evolution of both scientific and public opinion against a backdrop of global trauma and suspicion. With wit, expertise, and in their signature lightly sardonic tone, the hosts illuminate the complexities and consequences when intelligence, science, and politics collide—and set up the next episode’s exploration of what the spies actually found.

---

Next episode tease: What could intelligence agencies actually find out—and did the world ever get a satisfying answer?

Transcript

[David McClarsky]

For exclusive interviews, bonus episodes, ad free listening, early access to series first look at live show tickets, a weekly newsletter and discounted books. Join the Declassified club@the restisclassified.com.

[Gordon Carrera]

Where does the CIA think the COVID 19 virus came from? And could it have been intentionally leaked as an act of biological warfare? Well, welcome to the Rest is Classified. I'm Gordon Carrera.

[David McClarsky]

And I'm David McClarsky.

[Gordon Carrera]

And David, we're starting a two part series on the CIA and the wider US intelligence community's effort to determine the origin of the COVID pandemic. Now this is a story which really did affect the world and we're going to take a particularly Rest Is Classified lens on it, aren't we, to try and look at this really explosive and politically contentious question, which is where did the virus come from that killed millions and crippled the world economy? This episode is brought to you by hp.

[David McClarsky]

In intelligence work, it's rarely the obvious problem that causes failure. It's the overlooked detail or the flaw. Nobody quite solved the kind of vulnerability intelligent services look for.

[Gordon Carrera]

And running a business is the same, especially when you're building or growing a team. It's the risks you can't see or don't understand. HP designs technology so devices, collaboration tools and security work together as a single system, helping teams keep everything running smoothly at home, in the office and out in the field.

[David McClarsky]

The protection is built in hardware level security, working quietly in the background, helping reduce risk without creating more work.

[Gordon Carrera]

With a team of business advisors, HP helps businesses of all sizes find technology that fits their needs and budget.

[David McClarsky]

To see how HP helps businesses work securely and productively, visit hp.com classified the rest is classified. Listeners also benefit from 10% off HP business technology or with code TRIC10.

[Ad Voice]

Now on Acorn TV, there's a killer on the loose. Brook Shields stars in the new original murder mystery. You're killing me. You spin some crackpot theory and I find the evidence. I solve mysteries for a living. I think I'm good to go. Murder has met its match.

[David McClarsky]

You cannot be here.

[Gordon Carrera]

This is a police investigation.

[David McClarsky]

I've written you. What does that mean?

[Ad Voice]

He was a big city cop with a small jurisdiction.

[David McClarsky]

Boomers are so cute when they flirt.

[Ad Voice]

You're killing me. All new episodes now on Acorn tv.

[David McClarsky]

This episode is brought to you by Subaru. Go further in a long range Subaru hybrid with up to 581 miles per tank in the Forester hybrid. Longer range, better fuel efficiency and legendary symmetrical all wheel drive. Standard. The Subaru Forester Hybrid. Visit subaru.com hybrid to learn more. Maximum range based on EPA Estimated Combined Fuel economy in a full tank of fuel. Actual mileage and range may vary. So this story looking at the intelligence community grappling with The Origins of COVID 19 I think it is. It's a story about how spy agencies look at really tricky intelligence questions of a scientific nature. And frankly, spoiler alert, a story about the limits that intelligence agencies have when they look at those kinds of topics. And you know, it's also a story, Gordon, I think, about what happens when the spooks just cannot get to the bottom of a really important topic. What happens when there is so much uncertainty over a major intelligence question that the assessments don't satisfy anybody.

[Gordon Carrera]

And when that question, the topic becomes intensely politicized as it did in this case. And when you have political pressures, diplomatic pressures, global pressures and pressures from the White House, I think on the intelligence community about that answer because frankly, so much was at stake with this question in terms of where it came from. You know, who was to blame? Was there someone to blame? Was there a human hand involved in this? Or was it purely natural? I mean so much at stake, so much pressure and so much uncertainty really created a really heady mix which I think is fascinating for us to look at as the rest is classified to understand, you know, the pressures on intelligence communities and assessments when you get something like that happen.

[David McClarsky]

We should say up front that this series is not, not going to be an examination of the total domestic political debate or the ins and outs of the really detailed science around these questions. Even though we know Gordon Carrera loves himself rest his classified science explainer.

[Gordon Carrera]

There'll be a bit of that, there'll

[David McClarsky]

be a bit of that, but we're not going to go into the, to the sort of, you know, the all out political brawl that this turned into in the States. We're not going to go down to the sort of cellular level of the science, but we are going to show how intelligence agencies grappled with this question and how, I mean also this is another fascinating dynamic how when intelligence agencies get embroiled in a politically charged topic, they are then themselves accused of being of being political animals.

[Gordon Carrera]

So David, I guess, I mean I feel like probably like a lot of people, I blocked out how it all began and how it started. I mean there's this kind of odd bit in my memory where you know, of a period of months and even years which I maybe like lots of people don't think about. But we do need to go back there. And the first signs really came out in November, December 2019, not so much publicly, but in Wuhan in China, in Hubei Province, when there was a cluster of mysterious illnesses of an unknown cause. And that was the moment when something started. And actually that origin point will be quite important, won't it, to the intelligence investigation and trying to understand where it came from and who, who knew what, when. But that was where it seems to have first originated back in that period, around November 2019.

[David McClarsky]

And many of the earliest known patients did have connections to this Huanan Seafood wholesale market, which is a site that also sold live animals. So there's, there's an interesting cluster of cases in Wuhan, but also around this market, which we'll, we'll come back to in a moment. But on December 31st of 2019, China formally notifies the World Health Organization of that cluster. And in the first week of January, Chinese scientists have identified the cluster culprit, which is a novel coronavirus. Now, this is a type of virus which causes diseases in mammals and birds. COVID 19 is the disease that the virus causes. The virus itself is SARS CoV2, and it is related to the virus behind the 2003 SARS epidemic. The first known death is reported in Wuhan on 11 January. And just two days later, Thailand confirmed the first case outside of China. And then we get to, you know, these now iconic photos of, you know, China locking down Wuhan. But cases nonetheless begin to appear all over the world. It's. It's too late. And on February 11, 2020, the World Health Organization gave the disease its official name, COVID19 Coronavirus Disease 2019. In March, the World Health Organization declares a pandemic, which means that the virus has achieved sustained transmission worldwide. And then we enter this phase, which I think so many of us remember, of governments responding with these really unprecedented measures. Lockdowns, school and business closures, travel bans, mandates for mask wearing, the physical distancing, all of that. It's interesting because obviously this debate has carried through to today. Part of the reason we're doing this podcast, but the attempt, of course, to determine the origin of the virus. It's, we should say, it's not just a matter of curiosity for the scientific community. Right. There is a tremendous amount of value to be gained from learning where it came from, because that knowledge could help us prevent further pandemics, obviously, to understand the virology of how these kind of, you know, pandemics can start, where the viruses come from. So the question is not this kind of theoretical, academic one. It's hugely important. And of course there's a tremendous amount of investigation right away in the spring of 2020 about where it came from.

[Gordon Carrera]

That's right. And there were two general hypotheses. One is zoonotic, which means it naturally transmitted from animal to animal to human and through some kind of chain. And the second was an act involving a human in the sense of a lab leak. Now, we should say there are variations to what a lab leak meant. I mean, very few people, although there will be some who thought it might have been a deliberate leak from a lab. And so the presumption was that something accidentally had been researched on and then leaked from the lab. But those were the two theories and those basically remain broadly the two theories today which we're looking at. But it's interesting, isn't it, because very early on there is a lot of pressure, particularly from the scientific community. Maybe pressure is not the right word. There's a lot of emphasis from the scientific community pointing towards the zoonotic transmission route rather than the lab leak.

[David McClarsky]

I think that's exactly right. Much of the framing for the conversation came, I mean, right away in mid February of 2020. There's something called the Lancet statement. Now, Lancet is, it's a very respected and influential medical journal. The statement is signed by 27 scientists. It expresses solidarity with Chinese colleagues and condemned, quote, conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID 19 does not have a natural origin. And so right off the bat you have this kind of, this very influential statement from a bunch of scientists saying you are xenophobic and a conspiracy theorist if you are proposing the lab hypothesis. And we should say though, that I think much of the research, the scientific research at the time, again, there wasn't total consensus, but I think there, there was the early science on this suggested that the zoonotic hypothesis was, was the answer because there was a highly influential article in a publication called Nature Medicine that was titled the proximal origin of SARS COV2. This is released in mid March of 2020. So just as we're, you know, the world's going into, into lockdown. The article used comparative analysis of viral genomes and the central conclusion. And I'm dramatically simplifying the science here. And we're, we're not even, we're not even turning to Gordon Carrera, restless classified science explainer, to go to go deep into O linked glycans and the polybasic furin cleavage site.

[Gordon Carrera]

We could.

[David McClarsky]

Sounds very exciting, but we're not going to. And basically the article says the virus arose through natural processes rather than deliberate laboratory engineering. And that engineering point again, we'll come back to this because there's some different variations on the lab leak theory, but this seems to point toward a, you know, zoonotic transmission rather than something that's been engineered in a Chinese lab. The paper lays out a couple plausible kind of natural pathways. It says, look, the virus could have acquired its adaptations in an animal host and then jumped to humans, or it could have jumped first and then adapted during a period of undetected human to human spread. They consider bats the most likely reservoir for the virus. Now the paper's hugely influential, hugely influential that spring. It's one of the most read scientific papers of its era and it is treated as something close to a definitive answer in mainstream public health and media circles. So for example, Anthony Fauci, who is the top infectious disease public health official in the U.S. he cites it from the White House podium in April 2020 as evidence that the virus's features are consistent with an animal to human jump. And of course there's a lot of fear at this time that this thing, you know, is, is a genetically modified virus that has been, has been built to be more infectious and more deadly than any other of these kind of, you know, SARS viruses before. So the sense of the scientific community, I think that spring looks like, okay, this is, this is a zoonotic virus like we have seen for example with SARS back in 2003. Now the initial thinking is that the virus probably originated out of that wholesale market in Wuhan. And it's probably worth, I mean, a little bit on this market because it's turned out to be a centerpiece of the debate.

[Gordon Carrera]

Yes, because if the idea is that it's transmitted through animals and through different animals eventually to humans, then a wet market where animals are being sold and a kind of wide range of animals are being sold like this Wuhan wet market is a perfect place for that to develop and for that to spread. So the, the wholesale market is this poorly ventilated market. There's still pictures of it you can find full of stalls where wild animals are sold for food. And I was reading the list and it is extraordinary. There's snakes, badgers, muskrats, birds, raccoon dogs, which look like I've discovered long legged raccoons but are more closely related to foxes. And it's actually thought that in that the SARS virus back in 2002, 2003 went from bats through these raccoon dogs, potentially to, to humans. So the idea was that this is a perfect place if you imagine that there is a transition of this through animals, eventually to humans for that to take place. And, and that eventually, quite quickly actually, the Chinese authorities are going to close it down, hose it down by January 1, by which case it's too late. So that's the market. And I think it's fair to say that that was the consensus. It felt like theory that that's where it had originated. And the scientific paper did seem to push towards that idea and emphasize that possibility.

[David McClarsky]

Didn't, did. And at the time, although the paper has become hugely controversial for a number of reasons, but mostly because Freedom of Information act requests and then subsequent congressional investigations have unearthed all these emails and slack messages showing that the authors had privately discussed the lab leak scenario as a plausible one, even as the paper seems to dismiss a lab origin. Right, so there are like private remarks in there from an author telling colleagues that a lab escape was quote, so friggin likely. And so there's politics around even that paper. But at the time in the spring of 2020, I think the lab origin speculation is treated as a kind of conspiracy theory. And it's often blended with this idea, which I think is what those scientists are initially reacting to in the Lancet statement with this idea that the virus was a bioweapon that had been developed by the Chinese, which of course is like the nightmare scenario that this is some bioweapon that got out. But in any case, it's kind of, if you were in the lab leak camp in the early days of the virus, you're seen as a bit of a nut. I mean, ABC News runs a piece headlined, Sorry, Conspiracy theorists study concludes COVID 19 is not a Laboratory construct. The lab leak idea was banned on Facebook until I think the spring of 2021 as a form of misinformation. The New York Times ran a feature on the pandemic's origins in the summer of 2020 that groups lab speculation with, you know, other conspiracy theories, aliens, JFK assassination, all this kind of stuff. So I think that's the sense of the scientific community, the political kind of commentary around this. As we get into late spring of 2020, maybe there, Gordon, we take a break. When we come back, we'll see how the spies begin stepping into the fray.

[Gordon Carrera]

Hello everybody. I hope you realize, dear listeners, that Father's Day is coming up on the 21st of June.

[David McClarsky]

It's all very exciting, Gordon. And if you haven't got anything yet for your father. And if you're on speaking terms, we have an incredible gift idea for you.

[Gordon Carrera]

Because what more do dads love than something intelligence and espionage related?

[David McClarsky]

Ooh. And this year we're offering 25% off a gifted annual membership to the Declassified

[Gordon Carrera]

Club so you can treat your father to early access to full series, bonus episodes, and much, much more.

[David McClarsky]

That's right, you could gift your dad what he truly wants, which is six hours on a rock WMD with no ads in between. Give him the gift of more Gordon and David in his life.

[Gordon Carrera]

Yeah, that sounds good to me. So just head to the restisclassified.com and go to the Gifts page. The gift will land straight in your father's inbox on Father's Day and it'll

[David McClarsky]

give us access to your computer. And if you want to give your dad something special to open on the day itself, why not gift him our exclusive Secret Squirrel World's T shirt? Your gift confirmation email will include a discount code for one of these brilliant T shirts.

[Gordon Carrera]

Now that is a Father's Day present.

[Gary Lineker]

Hi, this is Gary Lineker from Goal Hangers. The rest is football. This episode is brought to you by Wise. It's only when you start moving money between currencies that you really think about the exchange rate, the fee, and what might be hidden away in the small print. Whether you're living abroad, paying someone overseas, or just trying to manage your money across borders, you want a fair exchange rate and easy transfer and no surprises along the way. Wise keeps things simple. Wise is a smart way to move the currencies you need around the globe. It works in more than 160 countries and with over 40 currencies, most transfers arrive instantly. Wise uses the mid market exchange rate like the one you see on Google, which with no markups or hidden fees. So when money needs to move, you can see the rate, know the fee and get on with it. Join millions saving billions on hidden fees by downloading the Wise app today. Be smart. Get wise T's and C's apply did

[Ad Voice]

you know about 1 in 3 people with plaque psoriasis may also develop psoriatic arthritis, which causes joint pain, stiffness and swelling. Does this sound like you? You listen to what it sounds like to be a million miles away. Trymphy Guselcomab, taken by injection is a prescription medicine for adults with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis who may benefit from taking injections or pills or phototherapy. And for adults with active psoriatic arthritis, serious allergic reaction and increased Risk of infections and liver problems may occur. Before treatment, your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. Tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu like symptoms or if you need a vaccine, imagine being a million miles away. Explore what's possible. Ask your doctor about Tremphya. Tap this ad to learn more about Tremphya, including important safety information.

[Gordon Carrera]

So, welcome back. We established that the idea of zoonotic, natural, if you like transmission is the broad consensus. And the idea of a lab leak is seen as a conspiracy. And it's about late April 2020 when the intelligence community starts to get drawn in on this. And I guess that's because it is a question which is still being asked by politicians, by the public. Where did this come from? What does the intelligence community know? And, and I guess it's natural, isn't it? We, we think there might be a secret out there. We want to understand something. What, what does spies have to offer on answering that?

[David McClarsky]

Well, you know, another theme of this question, the investigation around it will be that the Chinese government has not provided fulsome cooperation to, to really get to the bottom of this. And so again we, we've talked before the break about those early cases. You know, you, you'd want to have access to the early cases in order to establish, you know, have a better sense of the virus's origins. That's not happened. By the spring, there's been a World Health Organization kind of visit to China that seems to confirm the zoonotic hypothesis but also makes, you know, that sort of, that's where the Chinese government wanted to land anyway. So there's, there's this kind of, I think a growing sense that well, someone's covering something up. Right? And maybe the Chinese are covering up the true origins of this, which then seems to make this a relevant question for intelligence agencies. So on April 30th of 2020, the office of the Director of National Intelligence puts out what I think is a, I think this is a very ambiguous statement that I think ultimately kind of backfires because the goal was to suppress, I think the growing fur around lab leak theory. And the statement goes like this. It said that the intelligence community concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID 19 virus was not man made or genetically modified, but that the intelligence community would continue to assess whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a labor in Wuhan. And so the statement's not saying much

[Gordon Carrera]

but, but, but I mean I think, I think it's a Fascinating statement, because it's a. It's a statement designed to basically say, well, we're looking at the different possibilities, but it is holding out the possibility of a lab leak, of an accident at a laboratory. In a sense, it's putting it on an equal footing, so it's bound to at least elicit more interest in it. And I guess this is where, who else but Donald Trump enters the fray? Because we should remind people, I guess here that this is the tail end of the first Trump term. Again, another thing which people may have blocked out from their minds for various reasons, the undulations of American politics over these years.

[David McClarsky]

I don't know what you're talking about, Gordon. I'm offended. I'm offended as a Yank.

[Gordon Carrera]

But I guess one of the things to remember is at this point, particularly actually more in his first term, Donald Trump had been big on China. And I don't mean big in a kind of positive way, but he was pushing hard against China. Trade deals particularly. The temperature was hotter, I think, than it is now actually, at the moment, in the second Trump term when it came to China. And this is something which he is going to get involved in and where politics is going to meet this question of intelligence in the lab leak.

[David McClarsky]

Because at a press briefing just hours after that ODNI Director of National Intelligence statement, Trump immediately distances himself from the fairly, I'd say kind of nothing burger, but also balanced statement, factual statement that the intelligence community has put out. Trump distances himself from that pretty rapidly. He claims that he has seen classified information, that the virus had come from a lab.

[Gordon Carrera]

Wow.

[David McClarsky]

And. And when asked what the evidence was, he said, I can't tell you that. I'm not allowed to tell you that. Wow. So right off the bat, we have this unfortunate reality that the intelligence community's public assessments and statements aren't matching what the President sang. And so there is, I think, a real. If you're a kind of unbiased person who's looking at this, you're saying, well, either someone's lying to me or someone's hiding something.

[Gordon Carrera]

Right.

[David McClarsky]

And is it the intelligence community? Is the intelligence community sitting on information in secret that doesn't match the public

[Gordon Carrera]

statements, or is the President pushing his agenda against China?

[David McClarsky]

Trump is basically saying that he buys the lab leak angle. And so maybe it's worth setting up what that hypothesis actually is. Now, it's interesting that there is a. A lab in Wuhan, the Wuhan Institute of virology, the WIV. The WIV. It's been around since the 1950s. It's one of China's premier virology centers. Kind of looks like a college campus. Red brick buildings set beside this Mayo Bay Lake. And the WIBBS signature work has long focused on bat born coronaviruses. And it's an emphasis that really intensified after the 2003 SARS epidemic. The institute has a very prominent world renowned scientist, Shi Zhang Li, who's who had the nickname Batwoman. And the WIV housed one of the world's largest collections of bat samples and bat virus strains. There are only two other labs in the world that do anything similar. One of them's in Texas and one of them is in North Carolina. So right off the bat you have this very weird piece of circumstantial evidence coincidence that the world is in the midst of a pandemic caused by a coronavirus. And some of the most cutting edge coronavirus research in the world is being done at a nearby lab. That is just a fact. Now one piece of Shi Zhengli's work drew later scrutiny and it's in a 2015 paper she had showed that a spike protein of a novel coronavirus could be used to infect human human cells. And this is research at the boundary of what is now called gain of function work, which is essentially research. And again, well, maybe Gordon, you are the science explainer.

[Gordon Carrera]

I've done nuclear physics, but I'm afraid this is a little bit beyond me. But I find this gain of function work really interesting and slightly weird because this is taking a virus and engineering it in a lab to see if you can make it more infectious. And this is something scientists do to understand what the risks are of a more infectious disease and potentially how you can treat it and deal with it. But I still find it extraordinary that they do that. And this will be one of, I think the controversial aspects, you know, in the science world is the fact that people are doing this kind of work, which to me is inherently risky. I mean we hear so much about people trying to make bioweapons. Well, this is kind of trying to do that now obviously for good scientific defensive reasons and to try and protect people. But you can see the risks and the fact that there are also other researchers, including from the west, who are involved in some of this work and who have an interest in presenting it as something positive and not seeing it as something dangerous or that could have led to the release of coronavirus will become part of the story. Because I think those scientists are very keen to say don't look at this gain of function work as a problem because this is what we do and are worried about it. But what it shows is that they were doing that kind of work on coronaviruses and on bats here in this particular institute.

[David McClarsky]

And then on top of all of that, there's real legitimate concerns about the safety measures that are being taken at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. I think this is in maybe April of 2020. So it's in the first few months of the pandemic. The Washington Post, a reporter named Josh Rogan at the Washington Post breaks a story about concerns around those biosafety measures. And he got access to some State Department cables that had been categorized as sensitive but unclassified. And they are cables from basically that's kind of science diplomats that are at the US Embassy in Beijing who went on a visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology and reported back in these cables to Washington about what they had seen. And the cables warn about safety and management weaknesses there and actually proposed that the US might consider offering more attention and help. One cable warned that the lab's work on bat coronaviruses and their potential human transmission represented a risk of a new SARS like pandemic. And one of the cables From January of 2018 read quote, during interactions with scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology Lab, they noted the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high containment laboratory. Right, so there's, there's, there's worries concerned, right? There's, there's worries that predate the pandemic. Now she, Zhang Lee herself had also publicly acknowledged that up until the pandemic, all of her team's coronavirus research had been conducted in less secure biological safety level three and even biological safety level two labs. And BSL biological safety level four is like the absolute upper end. BSL two is like the equivalent of a doctor's office or a dentist's office.

[Gordon Carrera]

Wow.

[David McClarsky]

Okay, Right. So they're doing coronavirus research. Now, we don't know exactly is it the gain of function stuff, is it other research? But some of the coronavirus research is being done in facilities at the WIV that are, say not particularly safe. And there had also been, and I think this is also another piece of the mystery, collaboration between the WIV and military scientists attached to the PLA, the Chinese military that goes back decades. There's over 50 co authored papers. And frankly, on the face of it, you'd expect that, right? There's collaboration between the big national labs in the U.S. and the U.S. military, that's obvious. But this connection between the WIV and the PLA scientists, some of whom do work inside or adjacent to China's bioweapons program, raises the prospect of this worst case scenario which is was the virus engineered as a biological weapon and did it escape? Or you know, in kind of the more conspiracy end of it, did the Chinese actually release it on purpose?

[Gordon Carrera]

So we end up with a series of competing hypotheses or potential options to explain what had happened. One is zoonotic origin. This idea something happened at that wet market, maybe you know, a bat or something else through another animal, eventually to humans and that's why it spreads at Wuhan. And the other option is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. There is some kind of leak from there and it is this weird coincidence. You both have a, you know, at the place where the virus emerges, you have both a, a wet market which is a potential place and you have an institute of virology. And I guess within the lab leak theory as you put it there, you've got different possibilities, haven't you? You've got that just that there happened to be an animal there and it and the virus escapes or you've got that they were engineering something with gain of function research and that, that that escapes or you've got, at the most extreme end you've got the kind of the idea that they're building bioweapons to kill us all there and that that escaped. I mean they all sit within lab leak but different, aren't they to some extent.

[David McClarsky]

And also, I mean we should say, you know, by, by the middle of 2021. I mean the pandemic is an absolute catastrophe, right? Global confirmed deaths by that point are about 3 million against more than 140 million cases worldwide. And then when you look at the excess mortality estimates from the World Health Organization or the Economist, I mean the real figure is probably well above the confirmed count. The pandemic has triggered the worst global downturn since the Great Depression. So the question of how did this happen and how might we prevent it from happening again is a really, really, really big question. And as we get into 2021, those lab leak theories, and I think in particular the idea that it was zoonotic but had escaped from the lab somehow, or that it had been engineered and escaped somehow, are really starting to gain steam because there's no host animal that's yet been discovered to prove the natural theory, although that would be hard and I think is unlikely. The Chinese secondly, have aggressively blocked efforts at an investigation. The government had actually shut down the market. They'd ordered lab samples destroyed, tried to review any scientific research about COVID 19 and had a publication they'd expelled, team of Wall Street Journal reporters. So there's this question of, like, what are they covering up? Right. Why are the Chinese so insistent that we, we not find the origins of this pandemic? Right. And, and given the, you know, given China's authoritarian politics, there's this question of, well, if a leak had happened, would the Wuhan Institute of Virology with the scientists there have even been permitted to talk about it? So there's, there's more folk, much more focus on the lab leak hypothesis. There's a big Vanity Fair article by Katherine Ebon that goes deep into the open source researchers who are investigating Covid's origins and the fight over this question inside the government. And I think really importantly, the scientific consensus is starting to break down a little bit because there's a former New York Times science writer named Nicholas Wade who puts out a big piece basically looking at the scientific clues both for and against a lab leak. You know, he quotes a really respected microbiologist named Dr. David Baltimore who says that he believes that, you know, again, we won't go into the, you know, the absolute details of the science, but he basically says that when you look at the actual, you know, virus genome, that there are particular signs that suggest it might have actually been manmade. Right. Or genetically modified in some way. So you start to feel like this needs to be taken seriously. This can't be seen as a purely conspiracy theory going forward. And we should also say the public opinion on this is shifting. So the polling that's happening in the spring of 2021 shows that actually a majority of Americans believe that the lab leak theory was either definitely or probably true. Like figure 59% according to an Economist YouGov poll done in May, June of 2021. And there are indications that US intelligence has picked up, I think something useful finally to add to this debate.

[Gordon Carrera]

Finally, because that is the point is you have a mystery, but you would logically think there are answers out there that may be secret, particularly because the Chinese government is working so hard to prevent something coming out and to keep a tight lid on the investigation on the discussion about this, which to me makes it a perfect question for intelligence agencies to be tasked to answer. It's not entirely clear to me that they were yet looking that hard, but at this point, it seems they are starting to pick things up.

[David McClarsky]

You know, this is, it's a classic example of there are different tiers of intelligence questions, right? I mean, some are not as important as others. And what happens in the spring of 2021 is that this question rises not to the absolute top, I'm sure, but it gets to the point where Joe Biden, who is then president, having won the 2020 election and he's now in office in the spring of 2021, says, okay, let's have the intelligence community take a look at this and give us an answer. And he commissions a 90 day sprint to get to the bottom of the origins of the pandemic.

[Gordon Carrera]

So there with the sprint underway, let's stop and next time we'll look at what an intelligence community can find out about this highly contentious and incredibly world defining issue about the origins of the COVID virus. And we'll look at just how politicized that question and that debate becomes.

[David McClarsky]

Also a reminder, if you're not a member of the declassified club, shame on you. And you can rectify it right now by going to the restisclassified.com and joining the club where you get access, early access to series, bonus episodes and a whole lot of other goodies. Also, please do sign up for our free newsletter where you'll get in depth stories every week, many of which delivered by us. But otherwise we'll see you next time.

[Gordon Carrera]

See you next time. You can't reason with the sun.

[David McClarsky]

Trust us, we've tried. This summer, it's time to put that angry ball of fire on mute.

[Gordon Carrera]

Columbia's Omnishade technology is engineered to protect you from the sun's harsh rays that

[David McClarsky]

can burn in damage your skin.

[Gordon Carrera]

The sun is relentless, but so is our gear.

[David McClarsky]

Level up your [e-mail] to spend more time outside and less time slathering on aloe lotion.

[Gordon Carrera]

You're welcome. Columbia Engineered for whatever

[David McClarsky]

the right window treatments change everything. Your sleep, your privacy, the way every room looks and feels. @blinds.com We've spent 30 years making it surprisingly simple to get exactly what your home needs. We've covered over 25 million windows and have 50,000 five star reviews to prove we deliver. Whether you DIY it or want a pro to handle everything from measure to install, we have you covered. Real design professionals, free samples, zero pressure right now. Get up to 45% off site wide plus get a free professional measure. At blinds.com rules and restrictions apply. Athletic Brewing Co. Crafts award winning non alcoholic beers for those who want to be part of every round with over 185 flavor awards. They're exceptional NA beers that fit your lifestyle and any social occasion. Summer's full of good times, and Athletic fits right in. Go to athleticbrewing.com to have brews delivered to your door, or find them at a bar, restaurant, or store near you. Nierbeer Athletic Brewing Co. Fit for all times.