Prof David Robertson, of the University of Glasgow’s Centre for Virus Research, added: “It’s really disappointing to see such a potentially influential report contributing to further misinformation on such an important topic.”
“It’s true we’ve details to understand on the side of natural origins, for example the exact intermediate species involved, but that doesn’t mean there’s… any basis to the wild speculation that US labs were involved,” he added.
When approached by the Telegraph, Prof Sachs stood by his previous comments, adding that he personally “oversaw this part of the work” on the emergence of Sars-Cov-2. Last summer he disbanded an initial task force led by Dr Peter Daszak amid concerns it was too biased towards the natural origin hypothesis.
It was never re-formed, but Prof Sachs said commissioners had “consulted widely and met with a number of scientists”.
“Everybody has signed off on the final text. The question of a possible laboratory release mostly involves the question of US-China joint work that was underway on Sars-like viruses,” he said.
But Prof Peter Hotez, a member of the Lancet Commission and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at the Baylor College of Medicine in Texas, said there had been “diverse views” and that he had “pushed hard on removing” mention of US labs in the report because it was “a distraction”.
He added that he had been “speechless” when Prof Sachs appeared on Mr Kennedy’s podcast.
Countries still lack ‘meaningful’ pandemic plans
Discussion around the origins of Sars-Cov-2 was only a small element of the report, and experts said the rest of the paper was based on robust research.
The report found the Covax scheme was hampered by science policy and implementation failures, warned most countries still lack “meaningful” pandemic preparedness plans, stressed that more needed to be done to combat vaccine hesitancy globally, and noted the “striking… irresponsibility of several influential political leaders”.
