thank you for your company this morning. thank you for your company this morninu. , a, a, y a, , , morning. lewis vaughan-jones will be with ou morning. lewis vaughan-jones will be with you from — morning. lewis vaughan-jones will be with you from two. _ now on bbc news, what triggered the covid—19 pandemic? the bbc�*s global health correspondent tulip mazumdar looks into the main theories. what exactly happened at the start of this pandemic? where did this virus come from? what happened that brought us into this situation? this is the million dollar question. almost two years since the first cases were reported, we still don't know how my exactly where and when the deadly covid—19 pandemic

started. most scientists say the evidence so far points to bats. fist evidence so far points to bats. git least three of the four seasonal coronaviruses, if not all of them, really originated from the animal world. �* ., ., , ., ., really originated from the animal world. �* ., ., , ., , world. but a theory about a possible love incident — world. but a theory about a possible love incident in _ world. but a theory about a possible love incident in the _ world. but a theory about a possible love incident in the city _ world. but a theory about a possible love incident in the city where - world. but a theory about a possible love incident in the city where the i love incident in the city where the first cases appear to have emerged is being taken more seriously. == 5; is being taken more seriously. -- a laboratory — is being taken more seriously. -- a laboratory incident. _ is being taken more seriously. -- a laboratory incident. we _ is being taken more seriously. » —g laboratory incident. we must not discount things that have a 5% probability or 1% probability for something as important as this. ht something as important as this. it could have happened in a laboratory incident _ could have happened in a laboratory incident because where it emerged. coincidence itself is not enough. you need hard evidence. t coincidence itself is not enough. you need hard evidence.- you need hard evidence. i have re orted you need hard evidence. i have reported on _ you need hard evidence. i have reported on many _ you need hard evidence. i have reported on many diseases, . you need hard evidence. i have - reported on many diseases, including murders in saudi arabia. there is always politics and pressure. of the blame game is now severely impacting the science. ht blame game is now severely impacting the science. . . blame game is now severely impacting the science. ., , . , .,

the science. it was china's fault and china _ the science. it was china's fault and china will— the science. it was china's fault and china will play _ the science. it was china's fault and china will play a _ the science. it was china's fault and china will play a big - the science. it was china's fault and china will play a big price. i the science. it was china's fault i and china will play a big price. -- -a bi and china will play a big price. —— pay big price. we travelled to rotterdam to meet one of the scientist who was on the organised mission to wuhan to study the origins of the pandemic, and spoke to her australian colleague, who was also on the controversial trip. the more we argue — also on the controversial trip. tue: more we argue about also on the controversial trip. tte: more we argue about the also on the controversial trip. t"t2 more we argue about the politics, the slower the science takes to get done. ., , ., , the slower the science takes to get done. ., , .,, ., done. one in 4.5 million people have died from this _ done. one in 4.5 million people have died from this virus. _ done. one in 4.5 million people have died from this virus. we _ done. one in 4.5 million people have died from this virus. we owed - done. one in 4.5 million people have died from this virus. we owed them l died from this virus. we owed them and their— died from this virus. we owed them and their families answers. iama i am a professor of virology. i have been part of the international team because of my expertise on viruses and virus transmission studies. i have read about them, i have studied them. i have worked in this field

for 30 years, experiencing all sorts of different ball games. the professor— of different ball games. the professor has _ of different ball games. the professor has been - of different ball games. the professor has been at the heart of one of the world's biggest mysteries for over a year. tt is one of the world's biggest mysteries for over a year-— for over a year. it is hard. work has been _ for over a year. it is hard. work has been crazy. _ for over a year. it is hard. work has been crazy. pressure - for over a year. it is hard. work has been crazy. pressure on - for over a year. it is hard. work| has been crazy. pressure on my for over a year. it is hard. work- has been crazy. pressure on my loved ones, like everyone, has been crazy. being part of these kinds of discussions comes at a price. not everyone is happy with the scientific positions on this, so there are threats like every high profile virologists. you there are threats like every high profile virologists.— there are threats like every high profile virologists. you have had -h sical profile virologists. you have had physical violent _ profile virologists. you have had physical violent threats? - profile virologists. you have had physical violent threats? oh, . profile virologists. you have had i physicalviolent threats? oh, yes. physical violent threats? oh, yes. nine months ago the professor flew to the first epicentre of the outbreak with other international experts to try to find out how the pandemic began. wuhan city, home to ii wuhan city, home to 11 million people and the most populated city in central china. it prides itself

on being an international hub for science and the. it is also home to a number of traditional chinese wet markets, including the seafood markets, including the seafood market where the first cluster of covid cases seemed to have emerged. the professors ? where the professor in the team visited the market and believe it could be where the virus jumped from animals and humans. to me, just looking at the market and the layout of the market, with many different stalls, with many different stalls, with many different types of animals sold there, some of them live and imported from parts of china where we know that if the bat populations are most prevalent, and have most of these stars related viruses.— these stars related viruses. where are ou these stars related viruses. where are you on — these stars related viruses. where are you on the _ these stars related viruses. where are you on the origins _ these stars related viruses. where are you on the origins of _ these stars related viruses. where are you on the origins of this - are you on the origins of this virus? ~ , .,, ~' , are you on the origins of this virus? ~ , .,, ,, , , virus? well, they most likely is that it is bats _ virus? well, they most likely is that it is bats and _ virus? well, they most likely is that it is bats and i _ virus? well, they most likely is that it is bats and i think- virus? well, they most likely is that it is bats and i think we - virus? well, they most likely is. that it is bats and i think we may need to think about an intermediary

animal to explain how it actually got into people. find animal to explain how it actually got into people-— animal to explain how it actually got into people. and what evidence are ou got into people. and what evidence are you basing _ got into people. and what evidence are you basing that _ got into people. and what evidence are you basing that on? _ got into people. and what evidence are you basing that on? first - got into people. and what evidence are you basing that on? first of - are you basing that on? first of all, the genetic _ are you basing that on? first of all, the genetic evidence. - are you basing that on? first of| all, the genetic evidence. there are you basing that on? first of i all, the genetic evidence. there is one very close relative of it,... that was found in bats in china in 2013 after six miners got sick. three of them died. researchers studied and officially identified the virus. it is a 96.2% match with sars and closer relatives have been found in bat caves in neighbouring layers in the past few weeks. this is significant because both are the closest known relatives of sars and either, or both, could have changed enough over the past few decades to be able tojump enough over the past few decades to be able to jump into enough over the past few decades to be able tojump into humans, probably through an intermediate

animal. scientists have pointed to a few prime suspects, including pangolins, mink and raccoon dogs. understanding genetically very similar viruses can help scientists come up with a timeline for when and possibly where sars may have spilled over from animals. possibly where sars may have spilled overfrom animals. there is also possibly where sars may have spilled over from animals. there is also the fact this has happened a number of times before, most notably with the stars outbreak in china in 2003, and middle east respiratory syndrome whichjumped into camels middle east respiratory syndrome which jumped into camels and then humans in saudi arabia. irate which jumped into camels and then humans in saudi arabia.— which jumped into camels and then humans in saudi arabia. we have seen similar events — humans in saudi arabia. we have seen similar events spill— humans in saudi arabia. we have seen similar events spill over _ humans in saudi arabia. we have seen similar events spill over events, - similar events spill over events, but there also molecular evidence from information studies that at least three of the four seasonal coronaviruses, if not all of them, really originated from the animal world. so there is really a track record of coronaviruses doing this, so that is why i think it is really

still the most likely explanation. my name is dominic dwyer. i am a medicai— my name is dominic dwyer. i am a medical virologists and infectious diseases— medical virologists and infectious diseases specialist. and i have worked — diseases specialist. and i have worked in _ diseases specialist. and i have worked in public health virology for many _ worked in public health virology for many years. worked in public health virology for many years— worked in public health virology for many years-— worked in public health virology for man ears. ., _ ., , many years. professor dwyer agrees that all the current _ many years. professor dwyer agrees that all the current evidence - many years. professor dwyer agrees that all the current evidence points i that all the current evidence points to a natural animal spill—over. itirui’iiid to a natural animal spill-over. wild animals and _ to a natural animal spill-over. wild animals and farmed _ to a natural animal spill—over. wild animals and farmed animals were for sale in _ animals and farmed animals were for sale in the _ animals and farmed animals were for sale in the markets in wuhan before the outbreak. so all of these piece iiy the outbreak. so all of these piece by piece _ the outbreak. so all of these piece by piece lean towards the animal hypothesis. but it's important to remember that you don't necessarily -et a remember that you don't necessarily get a single piece of definitive evidence. it really is often about building — evidence. it really is often about building block by block to get there — building block by block to get there. �* .,, building block by block to get there. �* ., ., ,. , there. almost all of the scientist i have been in _ there. almost all of the scientist i have been in touch _ there. almost all of the scientist i have been in touch with _ there. almost all of the scientist i

have been in touch with agreed i there. almost all of the scientist i l have been in touch with agreed that based on the evidence available so far and based on the evidence available so farand animal based on the evidence available so far and animal spill—over is the most likely cause of the pandemic. but questions also remain over whether that spill—over may have happened by accident at a world leading corona research centre that happens to be in wuhan? in 2003, china was hit by the deadly sars outbreak caused by the sars covey one virus. it killed on the site hundred people. since then the wuhan institute of urology had been studying similar coronaviruses, trying to ensure the country was prepared for the next deadly outbreak. the research centre is around 14 kilometres from the seafood market where it is thought some of the first cases of covid emerged. and for some that is just too much of a coincidence. brute emerged. and for some that is 'ust

too much of a coincidence. we don't have certainty- _ too much of a coincidence. we don't have certainty. there _ too much of a coincidence. we don't have certainty. there is _ too much of a coincidence. we don't have certainty. there is significant l have certainty. there is significant evidence this came from the laboratory. evidence this came from the laboratory-— laboratory. china's secrecy, deceptions _ laboratory. china's secrecy, deceptions and _ laboratory. china's secrecy, deceptions and cover-up i laboratory. china's secrecy, - deceptions and cover-up allowed it deceptions and cover—up allowed it to spread _ deceptions and cover—up allowed it to spread all over the world. the trum to spread all over the world. tt2 trump administration to spread all over the world. t“t2 trump administration led the charge against china, blaming its leaders and pushing the laboratory leak theory without providing any evidence. fora theory without providing any evidence. for a while that hypothesis was put firmly in the realms of conspiracy theory. but some scientists quietly wondered whether under all the inflammatory and at times racist language, the trump administration may be onto something. tt trump administration may be onto somethina. , ., ., ., trump administration may be onto somethina. ., ., ., ., ., , something. if you have a laboratory related incident... _ something. if you have a laboratory related incident... trump _ related incident... trump radicalised the whole thing. that is the problem. people couldn't really speak out in any kind of support of that view or limits of that view because of being aligned with his ideology. t because of being aligned with his ideolo: . . . because of being aligned with his ideolo . ., ., , ., because of being aligned with his ideolo. . ., ., , ., ., ideology. i am a professor at the university of _ ideology. i am a professor at the university of edinburgh - ideology. i am a professor at the university of edinburgh medicall

university of edinburgh medical schoot — school. looking at the pieces school. — looking at the pieces of evidence we have already in trying to connect the dots. — have already in trying to connect the dots, it looks like it was not bioengineered. it was a natural origin— bioengineered. it was a natural origin but— bioengineered. it was a natural origin but it could have happened through— origin but it could have happened through a — origin but it could have happened through a laboratory accident, a laboratory— through a laboratory accident, a laboratory leak, as you say, because when _ laboratory leak, as you say, because when it— laboratory leak, as you say, because when it emerged so close to the wuhan _ when it emerged so close to the wuhan institute of urology, which is a level_ wuhan institute of urology, which is a level four — wuhan institute of urology, which is a level four laboratory, the highest level of— a level four laboratory, the highest level of experiments with dangerous viruses _ level of experiments with dangerous viruses to— level of experiments with dangerous viruses to humans, and also because we have _ viruses to humans, and also because we have not— viruses to humans, and also because we have not had a full audit in transparency from the chinese government, norfound transparency from the chinese government, nor found an intermediary animal host that would explain _ intermediary animal host that would explain the virus.— explain the virus. questions have also been raised _ explain the virus. questions have also been raised about— explain the virus. questions have also been raised about what - explain the virus. questions have i also been raised about what exactly type of research was going on at the wuhan institute of urology, which had received some funding from the us. 7 had received some funding from the us. ? for virology. there have been claims scientist may have been carrying out controversial studies

where viruses are manipulated and potentially made on contagious. yes. potentially made on contagious. yes, i believe those _ potentially made on contagious. t2: i believe those exponents were going on because that is what we found out and try to understand viruses. ichina and try to understand viruses. china has called these _ and try to understand viruses. china has called these claims _ and try to understand viruses. china has called these claims pure - and try to understand viruses. china has called these claims pure lies. the spill—over is probably more likely but there is a significant possibility nonetheless that the laboratory was involved in some way, shape or form. the laboratory was involved in some way, shape or form-— shape or form. the international scientists on _ shape or form. the international scientists on the _ shape or form. the international scientists on the joint _ shape or form. the international scientists on the joint who - shape or form. the international. scientists on the joint who mission said they did ask their chinese counterparts whether these experiments were happening and whether any of the staff at the institute may have accidentally become infected. itide institute may have accidentally become infected.— institute may have accidentally become infected. �* ., ., , become infected. we didn't hear any evidence of infection _ become infected. we didn't hear any evidence of infection in _ become infected. we didn't hear any evidence of infection in the - become infected. we didn't hear any evidence of infection in the workers l evidence of infection in the workers in the _ evidence of infection in the workers in the laboratory. we didn't hear any evidence of culturing sars in that laboratory before the outbreak happened. again with the laboratory leak, happened. again with the laboratory ieak, if_ happened. again with the laboratory leak, if there was evidence to follow, — leak, if there was evidence to follow, that would be great, let's io follow, that would be great, let's go down — follow, that would be great, let's go down that pathway. if the us agencies —

go down that pathway. if the us agencies had come with more information, terrific, let's get on with it _ information, terrific, let's get on with it and — information, terrific, let's get on with it and try to assist them. but in terms — with it and try to assist them. but in terms of— with it and try to assist them. but in terms of taking it further, you then— in terms of taking it further, you then need — in terms of taking it further, you then need evidence to go further. gn then need evidence to go further. on then need evidence to go further. (gatt the 9th then need evidence to go further. the 9th of then need evidence to go further. on the 9th of february 2020, the joint who china mission reported its findings to the world. it concluded that a spill—over from an infected animal was the most likely trigger for the pandemic, followed by the possibility that frozen food came from another country into china, contaminated, and then a laboratory incident was at the bottom of the list of hypotheses, described as extremely unlikely.— list of hypotheses, described as extremely unlikely. what we were heafina extremely unlikely. what we were hearin: as extremely unlikely. what we were hearing as a _ extremely unlikely. what we were hearing as a result _ extremely unlikely. what we were hearing as a result of— extremely unlikely. what we were hearing as a result of the - hearing as a result of the investigation was that this was definitely not a laboratory related incident. that is how it was interpreted. we've got to remember full access was not granted to the team to laboratory records. and that just raises some questions as to why

the laboratory involvement was rated as extremely unlikely. i think that is over calling it. i think it is less likely, not extremely unlikely. professor gupta was one of 18 international scientists who publicly criticised the results of the joint mission, publicly criticised the results of thejoint mission, calling publicly criticised the results of the joint mission, calling for a proper investigation which should be transparent, objective, data driven and are subject to independent oversight. the who itself also had concerns about the experts's findings. privately it criticised the report for not providing specific evidence forcing the laboratory incident theory was extremely unlikely. {jut laboratory incident theory was extremely unlikely.— laboratory incident theory was extremely unlikely. out of the four hypotheses — extremely unlikely. out of the four hypotheses they — extremely unlikely. out of the four hypotheses they looked _ extremely unlikely. out of the four hypotheses they looked at, - extremely unlikely. out of the four. hypotheses they looked at, somewhat more less _ hypotheses they looked at, somewhat more less -- — hypotheses they looked at, somewhat more less —— likely or less likely. this— more less —— likely or less likely. this doctor— more less —— likely or less likely. this doctor and infectious diseases expert. this doctor and infectious diseases exert. ~ ., ,, ., , ., expert. what i know is that international _ expert. what i know is that international team - expert. what i know is that international team of - expert. what i know is that i international team of amazing scientists, from all over the world, went— scientists, from all over the world, went into _ scientists, from all over the world, went into better understand the virus _ went into better understand the virus. they had a mandate to study

and to _ virus. they had a mandate to study and to team — virus. they had a mandate to study and to learn from the chinese counterparts what they were willing to share _ counterparts what they were willing to share with them. and then you see the report— to share with them. and then you see the report that was out. they reported _ the report that was out. they reported several hundred pages long and is _ reported several hundred pages long and is a _ reported several hundred pages long and is a lot— reported several hundred pages long and is a lot of information on the molecular— and is a lot of information on the molecular epee, and the animal's susceptibility, and very little on the laboratory. it wasn't a mandate to begin _ the laboratory. it wasn't a mandate to begin with to cover that in full. dating _ to begin with to cover that in full. dating didn't have the full capacity is to do— dating didn't have the full capacity is to do laboratory audits. they did in there _ is to do laboratory audits. they did in there and — is to do laboratory audits. they did in there and they made their assessments. clearly, there is much more _ assessments. clearly, there is much more work— assessments. clearly, there is much more work that needs to be done for the laboratory hypotheses. do more work that needs to be done for the laboratory hypotheses.— the laboratory hypotheses. do you sort of stand _ the laboratory hypotheses. do you sort of stand by — the laboratory hypotheses. do you sort of stand by your _ the laboratory hypotheses. do you sort of stand by your extremely i sort of stand by your extremely unlikely categorisation? do sort of stand by your extremely unlikely categorisation? [30 t sort of stand by your extremely unlikely categorisation? do i stand b it? unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah- _ unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah- i— unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah. | still— unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah. | still think... - unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah. i still think... so, - by it? yeah. istill think... so, obviously the exact wording has gone viral. so, had we known that, then maybe that exact wording would have been a little bit more careful. just

unlikely as — been a little bit more careful. just unlikely as opposed to extremely? maybe. if that would take the sting out, yes. iwould not maybe. if that would take the sting out, yes. i would not mind saying that. �* ., out, yes. i would not mind saying that. ,., , out, yes. i would not mind saying that. ., , that. both professors told me they would welcome _ that. both professors told me they would welcome new— that. both professors told me they would welcome new investigations j would welcome new investigations into the laboratory leak theory if credible evidence was presented. so far, they say, they have seen is speculation. of the world health organization lead on thatjoint 0rganization lead on thatjoint mission to wuhan seems to raise some questions over how a laboratory leak theory could be defined. he presented a scenario to danish tv where it could be possible for a laboratory worker to accidentally become infected and trigger an outbreak.

we asked the who for an interview but the agency declined. mr; we asked the who for an interview but the agency declined.— we asked the who for an interview but the agency declined. my name is david hayman and _ but the agency declined. my name is david hayman and i _ but the agency declined. my name is david hayman and i am _ but the agency declined. my name is david hayman and i am a _ but the agency declined. my name is david hayman and i am a professor. but the agency declined. my name is| david hayman and i am a professor of infectious disease epidemiology at the london's of hygiene and tropical medicine. there have been several laboratory accidents of these very lethal pathogens in the past. the last cases of sars coronavirus in 2003 had the origin in laboratory accidents in singapore, in taiwan and in china. so, laboratory accidents do occur, despite very rigorous measures to try to prevent them from happening. so rigorous measures to try to prevent them from happening.— rigorous measures to try to prevent them from happening. so this is not as in the conspiracy _ them from happening. so this is not as in the conspiracy rounds - them from happening. so this is not as in the conspiracy rounds as - as in the conspiracy rounds as perhaps it was made out at the very

beginning? perhaps it was made out at the very beuuinnin? ., �*, ., ., beginning? what's most important to understand is — beginning? what's most important to understand is that _ beginning? what's most important to understand is that laboratory - understand is that laboratory accidents can occur. whatever is being manipulated in that laboratory could leave the laboratory when a person becomes infected, or through some kind of waste material coming out of the laboratory. this pandemic has killed at — out of the laboratory. this pandemic has killed at least _ out of the laboratory. this pandemic has killed at least 4.9 _ out of the laboratory. this pandemic has killed at least 4.9 million - has killed at least 4.9 million people. it has turned our lives as we knew them upside down. health systems have been overwhelmed. and families forced to stay apart. there is always politics and blame games a new disease outbreaks, but there are concerned —— concerns that the massive impact of covid and the geopolitical infighting is severely hindering the science. china still has not shared some of the key data from the earliest days of the pandemic, including information

about the very first suspected cases. from the start its leaders have tried to control the information coming out. what is it like going into these countries? no country wants to be investigated in this way, they want their own people to do it. tt this way, they want their own people to do it. . this way, they want their own people to do it. , ., , ., ., to do it. it is not this idea of auoin to do it. it is not this idea of going in _ to do it. it is not this idea of going in taking _ to do it. it is not this idea of going in taking specimens . to do it. it is not this idea of. going in taking specimens and running. what has to be done is you have to go into a country, work with the country and together come up with hypotheses. and remember countries are southern and they make their own decisions.— their own decisions. there is a difficulty there _ their own decisions. there is a difficulty there if _ their own decisions. there is a difficulty there if the _ their own decisions. there is a | difficulty there if the sovereign country wants to shape what the science says. tt country wants to shape what the science says-— science says. it can be very frustrating. _ science says. it can be very frustrating. to _ science says. it can be very frustrating. to do - science says. it can be very frustrating. to do an - science says. it can be very - frustrating. to do an investigation to understand the source and not be able to talk about that. governments t to cover able to talk about that. governments try to cover up _ able to talk about that. governments try to cover up outbreaks _ able to talk about that. governments try to cover up outbreaks because i try to cover up outbreaks because nobby— try to cover up outbreaks because nobby wants to be responsible for

this and _ nobby wants to be responsible for this and to be in somewhere blame for this, _ this and to be in somewhere blame forthis, especially when this and to be in somewhere blame for this, especially when there is an outpouring of anger. what you see is people _ an outpouring of anger. what you see is people saying, who caused covid? it is is people saying, who caused covid? it is always— is people saying, who caused covid? it is always over there, it is always— it is always over there, it is always them, nobody wants to take the responsibility. in some way i think— the responsibility. in some way i think this — the responsibility. in some way i think this might have backfired on the chinese got mad because instead of actually— the chinese got mad because instead of actually getting more trust in more _ of actually getting more trust in more cooperation, it seems to have led to— more cooperation, it seems to have led to more — more cooperation, it seems to have led to more scrutiny and more scepticism over, what are you hiding if you _ scepticism over, what are you hiding if you are _ scepticism over, what are you hiding if you are not — scepticism over, what are you hiding if you are not willing to be more transparent? the if you are not willing to be more transparent?— if you are not willing to be more transparent? the who is the un auen transparent? the who is the un agency the _ transparent? the who is the un agency the world _ transparent? the who is the un agency the world turns _ transparent? the who is the un agency the world turns to - transparent? the who is the un agency the world turns to during | agency the world turns to during international health emergencies but it can't force its member countries to share information. it has been accused of being too close to china, especially in the early days of the pandemic. especially in the early days of the andemic. . . especially in the early days of the andemic. , , ., . , pandemic. this is all politics. the who is a political _ pandemic. this is all politics. the who is a political organisation. i pandemic. this is all politics. the| who is a political organisation. its membership relies and its funds rely on governments funding it, essentially, so therefore it is politicised. so essentially, so therefore it is politicised— essentially, so therefore it is oliticised. ., , ., , politicised. so what is the answer? how do you — politicised. so what is the answer? how do you get — politicised. so what is the answer? how do you get to _ politicised. so what is the answer? how do you get to the _ politicised. so what is the answer? how do you get to the truth? - politicised. so what is the answer? how do you get to the truth? i'm l politicised. so what is the answer? l how do you get to the truth? i'm not sure we have — how do you get to the truth? i'm not sure we have a _ how do you get to the truth? i'm not sure we have a well, _ how do you get to the truth? i'm not

sure we have a well, actually. - how do you get to the truth? i'm not sure we have a well, actually. in - sure we have a well, actually. in that sense — sure we have a well, actually. in that sense we just have to realise that sense we just have to realise that we _ that sense we just have to realise that we don't know. that is the thing — that we don't know. that is the thing. they should be questions of what happened here. i'm not sure we are going _ what happened here. i'm not sure we are going to— what happened here. i'm not sure we are going to get any further information. that - information. that dutch tv interview with the who joint studies international lead also raised questions around whether the international team were pressured into presenting the laboratory leak theory as extremely unlikely, suggesting that this was the only way it was allowed to be featured in the final report. translation: £18 featured in the final report. translation:— featured in the final report. translation: i~ ., ,, ., translation: 48 hours before we were done with the — translation: 48 hours before we were done with the mission, _ translation: 48 hours before we were done with the mission, we _ translation: 48 hours before we were done with the mission, we still- done with the mission, we still hadn't agreed on whether to mention the laboratory in the report. my counterpart and i went out into the hallway and discussed how to resolve the impasse, so we could move on. that is when i said we had to include it or we don't have a report. he agreed that we could mention it in the report on the

condition that we wouldn't recommend specific studies on that hypotheses, we would just leave it there. he we would 'ust leave it there. he basicall we would just leave it there. he basically suggested that yes, there was pressure, and that is why it was characterised in that way and if it hadn't been written and is extremely unlikely, or there is no further investigation needed, then it can appear on that report at all. igrate appear on that report at all. we made it appear on that report at all. 2 made it clear that the laboratory hypotheses is not off the table but just out of the different ways this pandemic could have started, yeah, thatis pandemic could have started, yeah, that is on the bottom of our list. do you think the chinese scientist at pressure put on them from that perspective?— perspective? that is quite likely because as _ perspective? that is quite likely because as you _ perspective? that is quite likely because as you say, _ perspective? that is quite likely because as you say, all- perspective? that is quite likely because as you say, all sars i because as you say, all sars research has been porter a national committee. of course, it is difficult to know exactly who knows what and controls what, but it is clear that there is a chain of

command. but having said that, it was a good group of scientists. i think there is a question of why do we _ i think there is a question of why do we need _ i think there is a question of why do we need to know this and how do we move _ do we need to know this and how do we move forward? politically there are huge _ we move forward? politically there are huge ramifications for the consequences. i'm less interested in that and _ consequences. i'm less interested in that and more interested in preventing scientifically something of this— preventing scientifically something of this happening again. if there was a _ of this happening again. if there was a laboratory leak, how do we have _ was a laboratory leak, how do we have better procedures? if it was a natural _ have better procedures? if it was a natural origin, we have to look at where _ natural origin, we have to look at where it— natural origin, we have to look at where it was, was it farming? was it keeping _ where it was, was it farming? was it keeping animals close together? how do we _ keeping animals close together? how do we regulate that so we don't have the next _ do we regulate that so we don't have the next virus emerging? the do we regulate that so we don't have the next virus emerging?— do we regulate that so we don't have the next virus emerging? the who has tou~hened the next virus emerging? the who has toughened its — the next virus emerging? the who has toughened its stance _ the next virus emerging? the who has toughened its stance on _ the next virus emerging? the who has toughened its stance on china, - the next virus emerging? the who has toughened its stance on china, again i toughened its stance on china, again calling for the country to share crucial data from some of the earliest suspected cases of covid. and it's been more explicit about the need for investigations into a possible laboratory incident. igrate the need for investigations into a possible laboratory incident. we are askinu possible laboratory incident. we are asking actually _ possible laboratory incident. we are asking actually china _ possible laboratory incident. we are asking actually china to _ possible laboratory incident. we are asking actually china to be -

asking actually china to be transparent, open and cooperate. and we need _ transparent, open and cooperate. and we need information, direct information, and what the situation of these _ information, and what the situation of these laboratories were before. and at— of these laboratories were before. and at the — of these laboratories were before. and at the start of the pandemic. chinese _ and at the start of the pandemic. chinese officials did not agree to do an interview with us but they did sent us a statement which said china has always supported and will continue participating in science —based origin is tracing. it added, a few politicians in the us and some other western countries are spreading lies that have no foundation in science. it said they are doing this to distract public attention from their own botched responses to the pandemic. and they describe it as pure political manipulation. in amongst all the political backbiting, the un agency says it is trying to bring it all back to the science. it's solution? the scientific for the origins of

novel— the scientific for the origins of novel pathogens. what this scientific advisory will do will set ”p scientific advisory will do will set up a framework to articulate what needs— up a framework to articulate what needs to — up a framework to articulate what needs to be done each and every time there _ needs to be done each and every time there is— needs to be done each and every time there is an _ needs to be done each and every time there is an emergence, or re—emergence, one of these high threat _ re—emergence, one of these high threat pathogens, so there is a standardised approach each time when this happens because unfortunately it will— this happens because unfortunately it will happen again. the this happens because unfortunately it will happen again.— it will happen again. the who has named the team _ it will happen again. the who has named the team of _ it will happen again. the who has named the team of 26 _ it will happen again. the who has named the team of 26 scientists l it will happen again. the who has i named the team of 26 scientists from 26 different countries which will make up the body and at the top of their priorities is finding the origins of the covid—i9 pandemic. tt origins of the covid—19 pandemic. tt is exceptionally important that we try to understand the origins of a virus. we have nearly a quarter of a billion confirmed cases around the world. it is likely to be a hell of a lot more. that is a human endeavour to understand a virus that has stopped our whole world. and i would ask everyone, countries, journalists, and everybody else, to

create a little space for that discussion to happen, because this is probably, right now, this is our best chance and it may be our last chance. , ., ,,., , ., ., chance. the professor is one of the selected 26 — chance. the professor is one of the selected 26 experts _ chance. the professor is one of the selected 26 experts and _ chance. the professor is one of the selected 26 experts and will- chance. the professor is one of the selected 26 experts and will once i selected 26 experts and will once again take on this mammoth task. t again take on this mammoth task. i think it's critical that we all realise that there are many different places in the world where things like this could happen. so, let's step away from accusations and move towards trying to collaborate, to really figure out what happened. the world can get more of these kinds of outbreaks and we really need to figure out how to prevent them. igrate need to figure out how to prevent them. ~ ., ,., .., them. we have the political will, we have the public's _ them. we have the political will, we have the public's attention, - them. we have the political will, we have the public's attention, we i them. we have the political will, we have the public's attention, we have financing. _ have the public's attention, we have financing, we have the scientists coming — financing, we have the scientists coming to— financing, we have the scientists coming to the title to make us better, — coming to the title to make us better, to _ coming to the title to make us better, to make all of us be better prepared _ better, to make all of us be better prepared as we go forward. this is a catalytic— prepared as we go forward. this is a catalytic moment. the clock is certainly— catalytic moment. the clock is certainly taking. i am hopeful that

we'll get— certainly taking. i am hopeful that we'll get closer to an understanding of the _ we'll get closer to an understanding of the origins of this virus, whether— of the origins of this virus, whether or not we find exact origins. _ whether or not we find exact origins, remains an open question. good afternoon. we have got two areas of low pressure affecting the weather this weekend. the first one has cleared through and has left some glorious sunshine across the country. just a few showers. as we head into tomorrow we have got a new low pressure system which will bring even wetter weather i think and stronger winds. even wetter weather i think and strongerwinds. here even wetter weather i think and stronger winds. here it is gathering force out in the atlantic. this is

the brief ridge of high pressure which has brought the fine afternoon so far behind the rain belt, which is slowly clearing into the north sea. a hang back for eastern scotland, north—east england. eventually, brighter skies around mid afternoon. there will be some showers in western england and wales, western scotland. wales, western scotla nd. temperatures i2 wales, western scotland. temperatures 12 to 15 degrees. 0n the breeze it will feel cooler than it has done over the last few days. any showers seem to fade away this evening and it will be clearer and chillier overnight. certainly across northern areas. a new area of low pressure sweeps into the south and west to bring wet and windy weather. temperatures will be on the rise. it will be chilly for the north. there is a good chance of catching the northern lights across northern areas with those clear skies. the clocks change tonight, go back one hour, which is good news, an extra hour, which is good news, an extra hourin hour, which is good news, an extra hour in bed. there is a storm moving from the south and west. bringing gales to the south—west early in the morning. some of this rain looks quite heavy. you can see the colours

as it pushes northwards and eastwards across the uk. it becomes confined into central and northern scotland in the afternoon. another afternoon of sunshine and showers further south, some of them will be heavy, blustery and frequent, certainly across western areas. drier further east. temperatures again 13, i4 drier further east. temperatures again 13, 14 degrees, feeling, because of the winter. halloween evening, if your trick or treating, is going to be blustery. lots of showers in northern western areas. the best chance of staying dry further east. we are in a run of north—westerly winds on monday. again there is going to be sunshine and showers. some of the showers heavy and frequent in northern and western areas, some merging together to produce longer spells of rain. some areas feeling dry. it will feel cooler. single digits in the north. double figures in the south, ii to 12 or 13 degrees. a ridge of high pressure builds in around the middle part of the week onwards. that will settle things down. a few showers. a greater chance of seeing some

sunshine. it will be chillier by day and by night. see you later.

ce nto this is bbc news with the latest headlines. world leaders are in rome for the g20 summit, where climate change and covid—i9 are expected to dominate talks. the italian prime minister, mario draghi, opens the summit with a call for multilateral action as the only way to solve the problems the world is facing. the more we go with all our challenges, the more it is clear that multilateralism is the best answer to the problems we face today. but a row over post—brexit fishing rights between britain and france threatens to sour dicussions. borisjohnson insists he doesn't want that to distract from the g20 or the key climate change summit in glasgow.

we are going to get on and do things that matter to both of us,