False Assumption Registry

COVID-19 Has Natural Origin

False Assumption: SARS-CoV-2 emerged naturally from wildlife and the lab-leak hypothesis is a baseless conspiracy theory.

Written by FARAgent on February 09, 2026

In early 2020, as COVID-19 spread from Wuhan, a group of 27 scientists published a letter in The Lancet asserting that SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin and branding the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory. Peter Daszak, head of EcoHealth Alliance, helped organize the statement; he had collaborated on a 2018 proposal to insert a furin cleavage site into coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. A similar letter in Nature soon followed, claiming analyses proved the virus was not engineered. Anthony Fauci, NIH director, echoed these views publicly, dismissing lab origins as unfounded. This stance took root amid reports of WIV researchers falling ill with flu-like symptoms in November 2019, just before the outbreak.

The assumption shaped global responses. Governments imposed lockdowns, citing the virus as a natural spillover from wildlife. Millions died, economies lost trillions, and political divisions deepened over mandates and origins. Critics later pointed to the 2018 proposal, which matched features of SARS-CoV-2, and questioned the safety of gain-of-function research funded by the NIH.

The debate remains hotly contested. Mounting evidence challenges the natural-origin consensus, with some experts arguing for a possible lab accident. Others maintain the wildlife theory, citing genetic data. Dissenters highlight conflicts of interest in the early letters, but no definitive proof has settled the question.

Status: Experts are divided on whether this assumption was actually false
People Involved
  • In the early days of the pandemic, Anthony Fauci stood as the public face of the US response. He directed the NIH and oversaw millions in funding to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research. Back in 2012, he had acknowledged that gain-of-function experiments could spark pandemics, yet he defended them as worth the risk. Critics argue this stance conflicted with his later role in a group of scientists who announced proof of natural origin for SARS-CoV-2. [1]
  • Meanwhile, Peter Daszak led EcoHealth Alliance and collaborated on a 2018 proposal to engineer a furin cleavage site into bat coronaviruses in BSL-2 labs. He signed The Lancet letter that condemned lab-leak theories as conspiracies.
  • Mounting evidence challenges the impartiality of such announcements, as several scientists, including Fauci and Daszak, were directly or indirectly implicated in potential lab leaks yet declared the virus's natural origin. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (2)
“Under Fauci’s leadership, the NIH had given millions of dollars to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research. In a paper published in 2012, Fauci acknowledged that gain-of-function research, which involves making naturally occurring viruses more virulent, might cause a pandemic due to a lab accident, but he said it was worth the risk. In his words: Scientists working in this field might say—as indeed I have said—that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.”— Podcast Bros and Brain Rot
“A group of scientists—several of whom would have been directly or indirectly implicated in a lab leak, including Fauci and EcoHealth Alliance director Peter Daszak—announced that there was scientific proof that the virus had a natural origin. A letter published in the Lancet, which was signed by 27 scientists including Daszak, stated: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin....Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice.””— Podcast Bros and Brain Rot
Resulting Policies
Under Fauci, the NIH kept funding millions to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain-of-function bat coronavirus research. This continued after DARPA's rejection of a risky proposal. [1] The work aligned with features later seen in Covid-19, and critics contend it enabled potential accidents. The policy remains debated, with some viewing it as a contributor to the outbreak's mysteries. [1]
▶ Supporting Quotes (1)
“EcoHealth Alliance’s proposal was rejected for funding by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Nevertheless, in November 2019, several researchers at the WIV became ill with a mysterious flu.”— Podcast Bros and Brain Rot
Sources
ID: FA-20260209-8de990cf · Created: 2026-02-09T20:19:09.287837 · Schema v3

Know of a source that supports or relates to this entry?

Suggest a Source