Wuhan lab staff should clear up coronavirus rumours and lies and defend institute’s name, says scientist

Former staff member says the virology institute is at the centre of a smear campaign and staff should be proactive in clearing its reputation

Zhao Fei says it is important during the pandemic for the lab to reveal the truth promptly and openly, despite the fear of criticism

Reading Time:3 minutes

The Wuhan Institute of Virology in the central Chinese province of Hubei is among a handful of labs around the world cleared to handle Class 4 pathogens. It’s proximity to the first reported cases of the new coronavirus have put it in the spotlight during the pandemic. Photo: AFP

Published: 3:29pm, 18 May 2020Updated: 10:14pm, 18 May 2020

A former employee at a Chinese laboratory at the centre of rumours about the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, urged the research facility and its scientists to be proactive and speak out to clear up misinformation about the coronavirus.

Zhao Fei, who studied and worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) for several years until the end of 2018, published a long defence of the institute on ScienceNet on the weekend. His article rejected theories that the Covid-19 virus was manufactured in – or had accidentally leaked from – the institute.

Zhao accused media reports and politicians of “smearing” the institute and its renowned researcher Shi Zhengli after the Covid-19 virus was first reported in Wuhan in central China late last year. Shi has worked extensively with bat coronaviruses.

“From my personal point of view, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and Shi Zhengli should stand up and refute the rumours and stigmas one by one but they are also subject to certain restrictions in this situation,” Zhao wrote.

“I believe it is better for you to honestly, objectively, and rationally tell everyone the real situation, including your work, efforts, achievements and the pressure you are facing, your responsibilities, and even your mistakes … it would be far better and more convincing than my response and analysis.”