On August 27^th, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) released an unclassified summary of the results of its 90-day review of the origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.  The DNI serves as the head of the Intelligence Community (IC), a coalition of 17 intelligence agencies and organizations.

Key points of the summary are:

1. SARS-CoV-2 probably emerged and infected humans through an initial small-scale exposure that occurred no later than November 2019 with the first known cluster of COVID-19 cases arising in Wuhan, China in December 2019.
2. The virus was not developed as a biological weapon.
3. Most agencies also assess with low confidence that SARS-CoV-2 probably was not genetically engineered.
4. The IC remains divided on the most likely origin of COVID-19. All agencies assess that two hypotheses are plausible: natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident.
5. Four IC elements and the National Intelligence Council assess with low confidence that the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with it or a close progenitor virus—a virus that probably would be more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2.
6. One IC element assesses with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These analysts give weight to the inherently risky nature of work on coronaviruses.
7. Analysts at three IC elements remain unable to coalesce around either explanation without additional information, with some analysts favoring natural origin, others a laboratory origin, and some seeing the hypotheses as equally likely.
8. The IC—and the global scientific community—lacks clinical samples or a complete understanding of epidemiological data from the earliest COVID-19 cases. If additional information on the earliest cases that identified a location of interest or occupational exposure, it may alter the evaluation of hypotheses.

The summary points out that variations in analytic views largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh intelligence reporting and scientific publications, and intelligence and scientific gaps.  Furthermore, the IC judges they will be unable to provide a more definitive explanation for the origin of COVID-19 unless new information allows them to determine the specific pathway for initial natural contact with an animal or to determine that a laboratory in Wuhan was handling SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor virus before COVID-19 emerged.

Finally, the summary concludes that China’s cooperation most likely would be needed to reach a conclusive assessment of the origins of COVID-19, but that Beijing continues to hinder the global investigation by resisting sharing information and blaming other countries, including the United States.  The IC concludes that these actions reflect, in part, China’s government’s own uncertainty about where an investigation could lead as well as its frustration the international community is using the issue to exert political pressure on China.

A copy of the summary can be found here: https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2236-unclassified-summary-of-assessment-on-covid-19-origins.