The Biden administration’s 90-day intelligence review of the origin of the coronavirus is nearly over. The report has been written and is currently being reviewed by outside experts prior to publication. Today, CNN reports that the report probably can’t reach any firm conclusion about which explanation for the virus’ origin is more likely:

Sources familiar with the initial report say that after three months of poring over data and raw intelligence, the intelligence community is still divided over two theories — one suggesting the virus originated from a lab in Wuhan, China, and the other suggesting it jumped naturally to humans from animals, the sources said. The report as it stands now contains “nothing too earth shattering,” one source explained.

…ultimately, China’s refusal to share information from the early days of the outbreak and the country’s lack of transparency has been a major hurdle, and officials had been broadly pessimistic about finding a smoking gun during the 90-day push.

Last week CNN had a real scoop when it reported that the intelligence agencies have a large collection of data on all of the viruses that were being studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. A database with that information was pulled down in September of 2019 with no explanation. CNN says it’s not clear if the intel community has been able to review all of that data yet for inclusion in the final report. In any case, on Monday of this week the Chinese reacted to the CNN report with more counter-accusations:

A report that US intelligence agencies are working through a vast catalogue of genetic data obtained from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in their hunt for the origins of the new coronavirus has met with a furious response from Beijing.

A foreign ministry statement on Monday accused the US of an obsession with political manipulation over the origins of the pandemic, along with a raft of counteraccusations centered on the Fort Detrick Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Maryland.

The ministry spokesperson accused the US intelligence agencies of hyping the “so-called laboratory leak theory” which it described as a “political farce from beginning to end”.

China’s response to the lab leak theory veered into absurdity over the past couple weeks as state media quoted a biologist named Wilson Edwards claimed the US investigation was driven politics. Chinese state media was quick to broadcast his anti-American opinions.

“I have the impression that WHO’s new plans, which include lab audits, are largely politically motivated,” Edwards was quoted as writing on the social media platform.

State-owned Chinese publications, including the China Daily and Global Times, quickly seized on Edwards’ supposed statement, which reinforces Beijing’s own stand rejecting more attempts by the US and the WHO to research the link between humans and the spread of COVID-19.

A Global Times article highlighted the “claim of intimidation” by Edwards, while a People’s Daily opinion headline cited “US attempts” to overturn the WHO report on COVID, using the same scientist.

There was just one problem with those claims. The scientist making them doesn’t seem to exist. The Embassy of Switzerland in Beijing pointed this out yesterday:

Looking for Wilson Edwards, alleged 🇨🇭 biologist, cited in press and social media in China over the last several days. If you exist, we would like to meet you! But it is more likely that this is a fake news, and we call on the Chinese press and netizens to take down the posts. pic.twitter.com/U6ku5EGibm

— Embassy of Switzerland in Beijing (@SwissEmbChina) August 10, 2021

State media outlets took down stories quoting Wilson Edwards. Oops!

Finally, CNN reports that the Biden administration is considering whether or not to continue the investigation once the 90-day report is in. At the moment, there hasn’t been a decision but my guess is they will let this drop because that’s the easiest thing to do at this point and because continuing would mean pressing China for more access to data.

If earlier reports prove true then the real takeaway from this effort is that the lab leak theory is far more credible than many people assumed early on. That doesn’t mean it’s true of course but contrary to the WHO investigation, it shouldn’t be dismissed without serious consideration.