> ...the natural origin theory remains supported by several novel coronaviruses published after the start of the outbreak....Here, however, we use in-depth analyses of the available data and literature to prove that these novel animal coronaviruses do not exist in nature and their sequences have been fabricated. In addition, we also offer our insights on the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated naturally from a coronavirus that infected the Mojiang miners.
> Since its publication, the RaTG13 virus has served as the founding evidence for the theory that SARS-CoV-2 must have a natural origin. However, no live virus or an intact genome of RaTG13 have ever been isolated or recovered. Therefore, the only proof for the “existence” of RaTG13 in nature is its genomic sequence published on GenBank.
For anyone who has doubt about her qualification on Covid-19, she is co-first-author (one of 3 equal contributing first authors) of Nature article "Pathogenesis and transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in golden hamsters"[0]
She is also the actual first author of this paper "Antibody Profiles in Mild and Severe Cases of COVID-19"[1]
The 2nd paper was submitted by her, accepted after she had left Hongkong, so other authors removed her name from the paper, but I guess they still had a little bit of decency left, they acknowledged her (as Scarlett Yan) at the end of paper. This paper, according to a researcher who developed the cocktail covid drug at Regeneron, was very informative and helpful to covid drug and vaccine development.
> ...the natural origin theory remains supported by several novel coronaviruses published after the start of the outbreak....Here, however, we use in-depth analyses of the available data and literature to prove that these novel animal coronaviruses do not exist in nature and their sequences have been fabricated. In addition, we also offer our insights on the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated naturally from a coronavirus that infected the Mojiang miners.