“Da ieri ricevo questo genere di insulti, che lascio giudicare a voi. Un attacco, senza precedenti, alimentato da una campagna di disinformazione montata ad arte da quella parte di opposizione che racconta di voler collaborare, ma preferisce falsificare le mie parole, piuttosto che favorire un dibattito positivo di confronto economico e politico su un tema estremamente importante come quello del sostegno alle imprese che si vogliono innovare, cosa di cui ho realmente parlato". Lo scrive in un post su Facebook il Vice Ministro dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Laura Castelli, pubblicando alcuni degli insulti e delle minacce ricevute via social.
"Questo becero modo di interpretare la politica fa molto più male al Paese, generando tensioni sociali, di quanto faccia male a me e alle persone che mi stanno accanto. Dispiace, però, vedere che per qualche like, o per qualche click in più, ci sia invece chi è disposto a tutto questo. Media e opposizioni, soprattutto in questo preciso momento storico, hanno un ruolo estremamente importante. Per questo, da parte di tutti, serve maggiore responsabilità e coesione, nel rispetto della corretta dialettica politica. Non ci fermiamo certo - assicura Castelli - a causa di questi attacchi, sono altri i problemi del nostro Paese. C’è una trattativa fondamentale in Europa, che il Presidente del Consiglio Giuseppe Conte sta portando avanti per tutti noi, su cui dobbiamo raggiungere il risultato auspicato, e ci sono i problemi degli italiani da continuare a risolvere, senza lasciare nessuno indietro. Andiamo avanti”.
Fitch
Ratings - London - 15 Jan 2021: Fitch Ratings has affirmed the United
Kingdom's Long-Term Foreign-Currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at
'AA-' with a Negative Outlook.
KEY RATING DRIVERS
The
UK's ratings balance a high income, diversified and advanced economy
against high and rising public sector indebtedness. Sterling's reserve
currency status, deep capital market and strong governance indicators
support the ratings. The very long average maturity of public debt (15
years) is among the highest of all Fitch-rated sovereigns and mitigates
refinancing and interest rate risks.
The Negative Outlook
reflects the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the UK economy and
the resulting material deterioration in the public finances, with Fitch
estimating the fiscal deficit to have widened materially to 16.2% in
2020 and government debt set to increase to 120% of GDP over the next
few years. While the UK-EU Trade and Cooperation agreement should limit
disruption at borders in the short term, uncertainty remains around how
the new trade arrangement will work in practice and how it will affect
the UK's trade with the EU over time. Conversely, progress with vaccine
rollout indicates a sustained recovery could start from 2Q21.
The
expiry of the Brexit transition period on 31 December saw the UK-EU
trade regime shift to a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) arrangement, ending
the frictionless trade in goods and services that came with EU single
market membership. A shift to trading on World Trade Organisation (WTO)
terms, which would have involved the imposition of tariffs on goods
trade, was narrowly avoided, but the FTA will still entail significant
new non-tariff barriers.
We have raised our 2021 real GDP
growth forecast to 5.0% from 4.1% following an estimated 10.3%
contraction in 2020. The upward revision stems from the UK-EU FTA, which
represents a positive development relative to our December GEO
forecast, which had assumed a WTO or 'no-deal' outcome. It also partly
reflects a stronger starting position in 2020; we have revised 2020 real
GDP growth to -10.3% from -11.2% on the back of stronger than expected
3Q20 real GDP growth. However, the positive impact on GDP in 2021 will
be partly offset by the imposition of a third nationwide lockdown in
January 2021 in response to the renewed escalation of the health crisis.
Latest monthly GDP data for November 2020 show a much smaller decline
in activity than seen in the April lockdown and suggest some upside to
our near-term GDP forecasts.
The new lockdown was imposed
following the sharp rise in Covid-19 cases, mainly due to a new strain
of the coronavirus, which UK epidemiologists estimate is up to 70% more
contagious. The lockdown will last at least until mid-February but
several government officials have said the measures could remain in
place until March. The short-term economic outlook is therefore weak. We
expect the UK economy to contract by 3% qoq in 1Q21, but we expect a
stronger post lockdown recovery from 2Q21 than before due to the
avoidance of no-deal disruption.
Prospects for 2H21 and
2022 have improved owing to the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines. The UK
vaccination programme is currently running ahead of other European
countries. The UK government aims to vaccinate the population over 70
years old and some other high-risk groups by mid-February. This could
allow a very gradual removal of restrictions from March. Fitch's base
case assumption is that vaccine rollout will have reached sufficient
scale to allow a significant easing in social-distancing restrictions
and behaviour through 2H21. Our 2022 growth forecast has been revised up
accordingly, to 4.7% from 3.6%, also helped by the improvement in
global prospects. Our projections point to a level of real GDP in 4Q22
that is 1.1% below pre-pandemic (4Q19) levels.
We estimate a
sharp increase in the general government deficit to 16.2% of GDP in
2020 from 2.2% in 2019, well above both the peak of the deficit increase
following the global financial crisis and the projected current 'AA'
category median of 7.4% of GDP. The deficit increase is the result of
the sharp decline in economic activity caused by the lockdowns and the
operation of automatic stabilisers, as well as the government's measures
to support the economy and address the health emergency. We estimate
the direct cost of fiscal policy measures since March at GBP182 billion
(8.2% of GDP).
We expect the deficit to fall to around 12%
of GDP in 2021 and 10% of GDP in 2022. We factor in additional
discretionary fiscal stimulus measures worth GBP76 billion (3.4% of GDP)
this year. Expenditures are set to decline only very gradually relative
to GDP as we expect rising political pressure to maintain high levels
of public spending, particularly on infrastructure (eg the
'levelling-up' agenda) and public services (including healthcare and
welfare). We are not factoring in fiscal consolidation measures for 2021
and 2022.
Our deficit projections imply an increase in the
gross general government debt (GGGD) to GDP ratio to 107% of GDP in
2020 (AA current median forecast: 43.3%) and to 113% in 2021. We expect
public debt to reach a peak of around 120% of GDP over the medium term.
The risks from higher government debt are mitigated by extremely
favourable financing terms. The average maturity of debt at 15 years is
among the longest in Fitch's rated portfolio, limiting the risk from
potentially higher interest rates. The average effective interest rate
on debt is set to fall to 1.7% by 2022 from 2.6% in 2019. The
quantitative easing programme by the Bank of England and sterling's
reserve currency status will continue to underpin the sovereign's
financing flexibility.
There is a high degree of
uncertainty around the fiscal projections. The Chancellor Rishi Sunak
had said that the government would put public finances 'back on a
sustainable footing' but the renewed coronavirus-related restrictions
mean that fiscal policy is set to reman accommodative for some time,
adjusting to the evolving health situation and focusing on job and
income protection. Once the health crisis abates, the absence of a
credible medium-term fiscal consolidation plan would increase the level
of downward pressure on the ratings.
The Coronavirus Job
Retention Scheme (CJRS) has been important in mitigating the impact of
the crisis on the labour market. The unemployment rate rose to 4.9% in
the three months to October 2020 from 3.8% a year earlier. Following the
sharp rise in coronavirus cases and the imposition of further
restrictions, the scheme has been extended to the end of April 2021.
Fitch's research suggests that unemployment would have surged to 13%-14%
in the absence of the CJRS. We expect a substantial increase in
unemployment as the support scheme is gradually withdrawn, with the
unemployment rate peaking at 7.3% in 1Q21 and the annual average for the
whole of 2021 to rise to 6.7% from 4.7% in 2020.
We expect
impaired loans in the banking sector to increase in 2021 as some
vulnerable sectors of the economy recover more slowly from the crisis
and the unemployment rate rises. We believe that the UK banks were
proactive in front-loading expected credit losses in 1H20, which should
moderate the implications of rising impaired loans on 2021
profitability. The UK banking sector scores 'a' on Fitch's banking
system indicator, which indicates 'high fundamental credit quality'. The
majority of UK banks entered the crisis from a position of strength,
with well performing assets, sound capitalisation, good funding and
liquidity profiles and adequate underlying profitability.
The
UK-EU trade agreement includes general provisions to support
cross-border trade in services but the benefits are likely to be limited
as they are subject to many exceptions that vary by service sector and
country. As a result, the UK is bound to lose some market access for
trade in financial services as there will be restrictions on whether UK
service providers can service EU clients. The UK and EU have committed
to establishing a Memorandum of Understanding by March 2021 to agree a
framework for regulatory cooperation on the financial services' sector.
The services' sector accounted for more than 40% of UK exports to the EU
and for about 80% of UK's gross value added in 2019.
The
Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has announced plans to publish
draft legislation to hold a second referendum on Scottish Independence
ahead of next May's Scottish Parliament elections. Although we think it
is highly unlikely the UK government would agree toa second referendum,
recent opinion polls suggest a majority of Scottish voters would back
independence in a second referendum. A vote for independence would be
negative for the UK's credit profile as it would likely lead to a rise
in the gross government debt/GDP, increase the size of the UK's external
balance sheet and potentially generate uncertainty in the banking
system.
ESG - Governance: The UK has an ESG Relevance Score
(RS) of 5 for both Political Stability and Rights and for the Rule of
Law, Institutional and Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption, as
is the case for all sovereigns. These scores reflect the high weight
that the World Bank Governance Indicators (WBGI) have in our proprietary
Sovereign Rating Model. The UK has a WBGI ranking at the 87th
percentile, reflecting strong institutional capacity and effective rule
of law.
RATING SENSITIVITIES
The main factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action:
-
Public Finances: Evidence that the government's fiscal strategy will
fail to arrest the increase in the government debt/GDP ratio over time.
-
Macro: Evidence that the new trading arrangements with the EU from 1
January 2021 will undermine the UK's economic performance over time.
-
Structural: Political developments that lead to a deterioration in
governance indicators and/or undermine the territorial integrity of the
UK.
The main factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action:
-
Public Finances: Greater confidence that the government debt to GDP
ratio will stabilise over time once the Covid-19 crisis has subsided.
-
Macro: Greater confidence and evidence that the UK's growth prospects
will prove resilient to the consequences of the Covid-19 crisis and the
new trade arrangement with the EU.
SOVEREIGN RATING MODEL (SRM) AND QUALITATIVE OVERLAY (QO)
Fitch's proprietary SRM assigns the UK a score equivalent to a rating of 'A+' on the LTFC IDR scale.
Fitch's
sovereign rating committee adjusted the output from the SRM to arrive
at the final LT FC IDR by applying its QO, relative to peers, as
follows:
- Macroeconomic performance, policies and
prospects: +1 notch to offset the deterioration in the SRM output driven
by volatility from the pandemic shock, including on GDP growth. The
deterioration of the GDP growth and volatility variables reflects a very
substantial and unprecedented exogenous shock that has hit the vast
majority of sovereigns, and Fitch believes that the UK has the capacity
to absorb it without lasting effects on its long-term macroeconomic
stability.
Fitch's SRM is the agency's proprietary multiple
regression rating model that employs 18 variables based on three-year
centred averages, including one year of forecasts, to produce a score
equivalent to a LTFC IDR. Fitch's QO is a forward-looking qualitative
framework designed to allow for adjustment to the SRM output to assign
the final rating, reflecting factors within our criteria that are not
fully quantifiable and/or not fully reflected in the SRM.
BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO
International
scale credit ratings of Sovereigns, Public Finance and Infrastructure
issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive direction) of
three notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a worst-case rating
downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th percentile of rating
transitions, measured in a negative direction) of three notches over
three years. The complete span of best- and worst-case scenario credit
ratings for all rating categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings are based on historical performance.
For more information about the methodology used to determine
sector-specific best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings, visit [https://www.fitchratings.com/site/re/10111579].
KEY ASSUMPTIONS
The global economy performs broadly in line with Fitch's latest Global Economic Outlook published on 7 December 2020.
REFERENCES FOR SUBSTANTIALLY MATERIAL SOURCE CITED AS KEY DRIVER OF RATING
The principal sources of information used in the analysis are described in the Applicable Criteria.
ESG CONSIDERATIONS
The
UK has an ESG Relevance Score of 5 for Political Stability and Rights
as World Bank Governance Indicators have the highest weight in Fitch's
Sovereign Rating Model and is therefore highly relevant to the rating
and a key rating driver with a high weight.
The UK has an
ESG Relevance Score of 5 for Rule of Law, Institutional and Regulatory
Quality and Control of Corruption as World Bank Governance Indicators
have the highest weight in the Sovereign Rating Model and are therefore
highly relevant to the rating and a key rating driver with a high
weight.
The UK has an ESG Relevance Score of 4 for Human
Rights and Political Freedoms as the Voice and Accountability pillar of
the World Bank Governance Indicators is relevant to the rating and a
rating driver.
The UK has an ESG Relevance Score of 4 for
Creditor rights as willingness to service and repay debt is relevant to
the rating and is a rating driver, as for all sovereigns
Except
for the matters discussed above, the highest level of ESG credit
relevance, if present, is a score of 3. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity(ies),
either due to their nature or to the way in which they are being managed
by the entity(ies). For more information on Fitch's ESG Relevance
Scores, visit www.fitchratings.com/esg.
Rating Actions
ENTITY/DEBT
RATING
PRIOR
United Kingdom
LT IDR
AA-
Affirmed
AA-
ST IDR
F1+
Affirmed
F1+
LC LT IDR
AA-
Affirmed
AA-
LC ST IDR
F1+
Affirmed
F1+
Country Ceiling
AAA
Affirmed
AAA
senior unsecured
LT
AA-
Affirmed
AA-
View additional rating details
Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com
Brexit
may well contribute to the breaking up of the United Kingdom. Only a
brave gambler would bet on both Scotland and Northern Ireland still
belonging to the UK in 2040.
UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson calls them the “awesome foursome.”
These days, two of the four nations that
make up the United Kingdom are less keen on Britain’s prime minister
than he is on them. The result could be a big threat to one of his
objectives for Brexit: stronger internal relations within the UK.
Kellner is a visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe, where his research focuses on Brexit, populism, and electoral democracy.
Historically, the UK has
never been a fixed entity. Relations between England, Ireland,
Scotland, and Wales have fluctuated. Less than one hundred years ago,
the UK comprised all of the British isles, before a bitter civil war led
to the secession of twenty-six of Ireland’s thirty-two counties in
1922.
Tensions have never disappeared. For three
decades between the late 1960s and the late 1990s, Northern Ireland—and
occasionally English cities—suffered from the Troubles, the Irish Republican Army’s (IRA’s) violent campaign to reunite Ireland by force. The IRA killed more than 2,000 people, their “loyalist,” pro-UK opponents more than 1,000, and the British army more than 300.
In Scotland and Wales, nationalist parties
have made their mark more peacefully. Both countries now have their own
national parliaments with substantial powers, but while the appetite
for full independence is limited in Wales, it has grown in Scotland.
Brexit has now added a new dimension to these historical tensions. It may well contribute over time to the breaking up of the United Kingdom; only a brave gambler would bet on both Scotland and Northern Ireland still belonging to the UK in 2040.
Let us take the two in turn.
When Scotland’s new parliament first met in 1999, one of its members was applauded for declaring: “The Scottish Parliament, adjourned on March 25 in the year 1707, is hereby reconvened.”
That statement is long on nationalist
nostalgia but short on accuracy. Scotland’s currency, and hence its
overall economic powers, is controlled by London—as are its defense and
foreign policy.
When the UK voted for Brexit
in 2016, Scots divided by almost two to one in favor of staying in the
EU. But Scotland was bound by the UK-wide result: it was forced to leave
the EU along with England, Northern Ireland, and Wales.
This reopened a debate that seemed to have
been settled in 2014, when a Scottish independence referendum resulted
in Scots voting by 55 to 45 percent to remain in the UK. It was supposed
to be a once-in-a-generation decision that offered Scots continuing
membership of both the UK and the EU.
Many Scots now feel that their only way to
rejoin the EU is to break away from the UK. More than ever before, the
nationalist and European causes in Scotland have come together—and have
been gaining support.
For the first time, polls conducted in 2020 report
that a majority of Scots now favor independence from the UK. The rise
in support is a direct response to Scotland being forced against its
will to leave the EU.
In 2021, Scotland will elect a new
parliament. The Scottish National Party (SNP) is set for its best-ever
result and will remain in power in Edinburgh. Together with the Greens,
also pro-independence and pro-EU, the SNP will be sure of a majority—and
possibly a large majority—for a fresh referendum on independence.
Legally, however, Scotland’s politicians
do not have the power to call a referendum. They can ask for one, but
the decision rests with Westminster. Here, the Conservatives enjoy a
large majority, and they oppose a fresh referendum. Johnson, the
Conservative Party leader, says the Scots should wait forty years before another independence vote.
In the short run, London’s veto will
prevail. The long run is another matter. If the Conservatives remain in
power in Westminster, and the SNP in Edinburgh, the stage will be set
for a constitutional crisis. Reluctantly, the Conservatives may have to
give way.
Alternatively, the Conservatives may be
voted out of office at the next UK general election. However, the main
opposition party, Labour, will find it extremely hard to win outright. A
far more likely outcome, if the Conservatives do lose, is a minority
Labour government dependent on SNP support. And the price of that
support will be agreement on a new vote on Scottish independence.
One way or another, a referendum is likely before 2030. Scotland’s departure from the UK is a distinct possibility.
Northern Ireland’s politics are very
different; but its destination may be the same as Scotland’s. Its
political tribes are driven by religion: the Protestant majority is
overwhelmingly pro-British, while the Catholic minority wants a reunited
Ireland. For the time being, therefore, most of Northern Ireland’s
voters want to stay within the UK.
But three factors are changing that simple political arithmetic.
First, demographics—driven by birth rates
and migration—are edging Northern Ireland slowly but remorselessly
toward a Catholic majority.
Second, a small but growing minority of voters reject the sectarian divide and no longer vote according to their religion.
Third—and this is the one respect in which Northern Ireland resembles Scotland—Brexit is making a difference. Under the new UK-EU agreement
on future relations, concluded on December 24, 2020, the island of
Ireland remains politically divided but is economically more united than
at any time since 1922.
There are no border posts, rules, or
tariffs to impede trade across the 500-kilometer border between Northern
Ireland and the Irish Republic; but trade between Northern Ireland and
mainland Britain is now subject to significant checks, resulting in empty shelves in Northern Irish supermarkets.
The demographic and economic logic of Northern Ireland points to Irish reunification in the next 10–20 years.
Already, polls indicate
a shift in views toward a 50-50 division on whether to leave the UK.
Meanwhile, the prospect of rejoining the EU—which 56 percent of Northern
Irish voters in 2016 did not want to leave—is attractive, not just to
Catholic nationalists, but also to the growing minority of
anti-sectarian Protestants.
Only in Wales do nationalists remain in a clear minority.
By 2040, Johnson’s “awesome foursome” may
be a thing of the past. Brexit could end up dividing the United Kingdom
more comprehensively than it divides Europe.
As
the U.S. marks one year since its first case, questions remain about
the origin of the coronavirus that causes the disease. The answers
matter.
Elizabeth Weise and Karen Weintraub, USA TODAY
Updated 2 hours ago
The coronavirus began in the
horseshoe bat genus, Rhinolophus. The bats are natural reservoirs for
coronaviruses, and the bats aren't affected by the viruses.
GETTY IMAGES/ATTILA BARSAN
The
coronavirus that conquered the world came from a thumb-sized bat tucked
inside a remote Chinese cave. Of this much, scientists are convinced.
Exactly how and when it fled the bat to begin its devastating flight across the globe remain open questions.
In
just one year, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, has
infected 100 million people and killed 2 million, 400,000 of them in the
U.S. Answers could stop such a calamity from happening again.
Researchers
in China, under government scrutiny, have been investigating since
January. This week, a World Health Organization delegation of scientists
from 10 different nations finally was allowed in the country to explore
the virus' origins.
"This is important not just for COVID-19,
but for the future of global health security and to manage emerging
disease threats with pandemic potential," Tedros Ghebreyesus, WHO's
director-general, said just after the team left for China.
A
worker in protective coverings directs members of the World Health
Organization (WHO) team on their arrival at the airport in Wuhan in
central China's...Ng Han Guan, AP
It's
not clear how much evidence will remain a year later, and what the team
will be able to learn. The Wuhan fish market, seen asa likely breeding ground for the virus, has been scrubbedand shuttered.
But
the effort is worth it, infectious disease experts say. Understanding
the journey of SARS-CoV-2 may provide insights into how the relationship
between humans and animals led to the pandemic, as well as other
disease outbreaks including Ebola, Zika and many strains of flu.
A
member of the World Health Organization team is screened on arriving at
the airport in Wuhan in central China's Hubei province on Thursday,
Jan....Ng Han Guan, AP
"These
are emerging diseases that breach the barrier between animals and
humans and cause devastation in human populations," the WHO'sMike
Ryan said at a Monday news conference. "It is an absolute requirement
that we understand that interface and what is driving that dynamic and
what specific issues resulted in diseases breaching that barrier."
The
international team is not looking to assign blame, said Ryan, executive
director of WHO's Health Emergencies Programme. If it were, there would
be plenty to go around.
"We can blame climate change. We can
blame policy decisions made 30 years ago regarding everything from
urbanization to the way we exploit the forest," he said. "You can find
people to blame in every level of what we're doing on this planet."
Beginnings in a cave
The
chain of events that led to the worst global pandemic in a century
started with a tiny, insect-eating mammal with the mundane name,
Intermediate Horseshoe bat.
The species is part of a family of
bats that act as natural reservoirs for coronaviruses, notorious for how
easily they mutate and how well they can be transmitted from species to
species. The bats aren't bothered by the viruses. The animals they pass
them onto aren't always so lucky.
Humans are one of those animals.
This
happens all the time – a virus harmlessly infects one creature then
finds its way to another, mutates and becomes something new. The newly
mutated virus can be insignificant but annoying (think common colds,
some of which are caused by coronaviruses) or devastating and deadly
(think smallpox.)
SARS-CoV-2 is a little of both.
A
Horseshoe bat hangs from a net inside an abandoned Israeli army outpost
next to the Jordan River in the occupied West Bank, on July 7, 2019.Menahem Kahana, AFP via Getty Images
As many as 40% of those who test positive for COVID-19 have no symptoms at all but 2% of people who get sick die. It’s especially deadly in the elderly. COVID-19
has killed 1 of every 66 Americans older than 85. Among those infected,
some percentage — we don't yet know how many — cope with crippling long-term symptoms that plague them for months. Future health impacts remain unknown.
The
group of related coronaviruses giving rise to SARS-CoV-2 has existed
for decades in bats and likely originated more than 40 years ago, said
Dr. Charles Chiu, a professor and expert in viral genomics at the
University of California, San Francisco.
SARS-CoV-2 shares 96% of its genetic material with a sample ofcoronavirus taken in 2013 in Intermediate Horseshoe bats from Yunnan province in China, which suggests the Yunnan virus is its ancestor. How the virus traveled the1,200 miles from Yunnan toWuhan remains unknown.
Because
the 2013 sample is the only one available, scientists had to
undertake genetic analysis to estimate when the bat strain and the
strain now circulating among humans diverged. They put the split
sometime in the 1960s or 1970s, said Maciej Boni, a professor of biology
at Pennsylvania State University's Center for Infectious Disease
Dynamics, who spent almost a decade working in Asia.
"There's
really not a clear tree where we have forensic evidence to point to
exactly where it came from," said John Connor, a virologist at Boston
University who studies emerging infectious diseases. "It looks like it's
a bat-derived virus, and there's a big question mark after that."
Scientists simply don't do enough surveillance of bats and coronavirus to tell.
"We
just don't know because we don't have any data — we weren't looking,"
said Boni. "Over the last 20 years we haven't been doing enough
sampling."
John Connor, virologist at Boston University who studies emerging infectious diseases
There's
really not a clear tree where we have forensic evidence to point to
exactly where it came from. It looks like it's a bat-derived virus, and
there's a big question mark after that.
Boni is among those who think the
virus most likely came directly from bats, possibly infecting miners who
work in bat-infested caves or people exposed to bat feces. Others say
it more likely spent some time infecting another animal species before
leaping to humans.
The original SARS virus, identified in China in 2003, is believed to have passed through civets – a type of nocturnal mammal native to Asia and Africa – though other animals may have been involved.
SARS underwent
only a few genetic changes between bats and people, which made its
animal roots easier to trace, while SARS-CoV-2 has changed a lot more,
Connor said.
With SARS-CoV-2, a suspect is the frequently
trafficked scaly anteater, also known as a pangolin. Other
possibilities include civets or ferrets or even cats.
“SARS-CoV-2
may originate from live animal markets, but it may also have emerged
from any setting in which people come into contact with animals,
including farms, pets, or zoos,” Chiu said.
Whatever its path, sometime before November 2019 it became a virus that could easily – far too easily – infect humans.
A
photo taken in the Chinese city of Wuhan on Jan. 17, 2020, shows the
seafood market linked to cases of a new coronavirus shut...Kyodo News via Getty Images
Not Made in China
Despite
a persistent conspiracy theory that SARS-CoV-2 was developed in a lab,
perhaps an infectious disease lab in Wuhan, there’s no evidence to
support the claim and plenty to counter it.
In March, a group of researchers found the virus most closely resembled existing bat viruses and was not man-made.
No
new details have emerged since to change the author minds, said Dr. W.
Ian Lipkin, one of the co-authors and a professor at the Columbia
University Mailman School of Public Health.
"Can we exclude the
possibility that there was a virus that was present in this lab that
somehow got out into either animals or people? No, we can't do that," he
said. "The only thing we can say is that there's no evidence that
suggests it was deliberately engineered through some sort of
gain-of-function experiments."
Connor said he's also dubious the virus originated in a lab rather than in nature.
The
Wuhan Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market, where a number of people related
to the market fell ill with a virus, sits closed in Wuhan, China,
Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2020.Dake Kang, AP
"What
laboratory people are really good at doing is making viruses weaker,"
said Connor, who is also an investigator at Boston University's National
Emerging Infectious Disease Laboratories.
Viruses, especially RNA
viruses like coronaviruses, make tiny mistakes as they reproduce. One
person's nose might contain 10 to a 100,000 copies of the virus, and
with so many replications and so many mistakes, it's plausible chance
mutations led to SARS-CoV-2, he said.
"I don't think we need to
look for man-made. I think we see the viruses that we know assaulting us
all the time," Connor said. "We look back to Zika. That wasn't
man-made. Neither was Ebola. Flu keeps coming after us."
John Connor, virologist at Boston University who studies emerging infectious diseases
I
don't think we need to look for man-made. I think we see the viruses
that we know assaulting us all the time. We look back to Zika. That
wasn't man-made. Neither was Ebola. Flu keeps coming after us.
It’s possible to bioengineer a
virus, but it’s extremely hard. Anyone doing so would have used a
pre-existing virus as the template. The virus that’s now killing
millions has novel mutations, many of them, said Chiu.
“We barely
know how to manipulate even a few base pairs in a single viral gene,"
he said. "The difference between Chinese bat coronaviruses and
SARS-CoV-2 is more than 3,000 base pairs."
In some ways, it
doesn't matter where the virus came from, said Stephen Morse, a
professor of epidemiology at Columbia University's Mailman School of
Public Health. What matters is how we deal with the current situation,
which is at a crisis state in the United States.
"When the house is burning down is not the time to start looking for where the matches were," he said.
Investigation and prevention
If
SARS-Cov-2 had been a type of bird flu instead of a coronavirus, the
world would have been alerted within days of the first infections. A
global surveillance system was established in the 1990s and has been
expanded and strengthened, Boni said.
"If a single poultry farmer
in Southeast Asia comes down with severe respiratory symptoms, samples
are taken and sequenced. That week you know which avian influenza virus
it is," he said. "Farms in neighboring regions are immediately
quarantined and the birds may be depopulated. It takes days."
Setting
up something similar for bats and coronaviruses would cost several
billion a year globally, said Boni. "It's not expensive for the benefit
we'd get."
To track SARS-COV-2 as it transferred among species
requires analyzing blood collected from the animals, as well as samples
from their airways.
Distinguishing between closely related viruses isn't always so easy.
"We
have a special test that can do this if we could get samples out of
China," said Lipkin. He's been trying for months to do so, and when he
attempted to send his own sampling tools into the country the U.S
wouldn't allow it.
"We now have obstruction on both sides," said
Lipkin, who's been working to get into China himself since early in the
outbreak. "I don't know when that's going to let up. I'm hoping the
Biden administration will feel differently."
Lipkin's March paper explored key features of the new virusbut nothing more has been learned since about SARS-CoV-2's earliest days, he said.
Staff
move bio-waste containers past the entrance of the Wuhan Medical
Treatment Center, where some infected with a new virus are being
treated, in Wuhan, China, Wednesday, Jan. 22, 2020.Dake Kang, AP
"We
still haven't had a full post-mortem on what went wrong in China," said
Lipkin, who caught COVID-19 in March in New York and was recently
vaccinated.
The U.S. has a very good system of reporting
outbreaks, and rapidly publishes information in the CDC's journal,
Morbidity and Mortality Weekly. The Chinese are not as transparent at
reporting their public health information.
Increased transparency is one of several changes Lipkin recommends to avoid a repeat of the 2020 disaster.
Wild animal markets and consumption of wildlife continue to pose dangers, he said.
And
the world needs to have the ability to respond faster to novel viruses
like SARS-CoV-2. Global surveillance would help, as would drugs that can
treat a wide spectrum of viruses – maybe one that can address all
coronaviruses and another to tackle influenzas.
"These drugs might
not be ideal but we should think of them as a finger in the dike,"
Lipkin said, so outbreaks won't get out of hand, the way this one did.
Connor,
at Boston University, agrees that effective and transparent public
health systems around the world are essential for detecting and
preventing outbreaks like COVID-19.
In
this Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2020 file photo, people wearing face masks walk
down a deserted street in Wuhan in central China's Hubei Province.Arek Rataj, AP
While Wuhan may have had a good health care system, that was not the case in West Africa, where a 2014-2016 epidemic of Ebola infected more than 28,000, killed over 11,000 and terrified the world.
"It
would be nice for all people to have good health care, not just because
it would be nice for them ... but for everybody else," Connor said. "It
would be nice to be able to identify: Oh, all of a sudden, five people
in one area got sick with something we didn't know what it was."
Connor
said it's pointless to try to predict all the ways in which a virus now
infecting animals could make the leap to humans. A much better
approach, he said, is to focus on the viruses that do emerge.
"What matters is how good we are at responding quickly," he said.
The race is now between the speed of mutations and the speed of vaccination, said Chiu.
Even
for a typically slow Sunday afternoon Grand Central Terminal in New
York City was quieter than usual March 15, 2020 as Coronavirus concerns
kept...Seth Harrison, The Journal News/ USA TODAY Network
Dr.
Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and
Infectious Diseases, says it may take up to 85% of Americans being
vaccinated to protect the population. Reaching those numbers will be
challenging considering pervasive vaccine hesitancy and a slow,
complicated roll out.
In the meantime, public health measures to
stop the spread – masking, social distancing and handwashing – are
essential, experts repeat.
“We have to reduce the number of
infections before the virus has a chance to mutate in such a way that it
can evade drugs and vaccines," said Chiu. "That’s what keeps me up at
night.”
Contact Elizabeth Weise at eweise@usatoday.com and Karen Weintraub at kweintraub@usatoday.com.
Health
and patient safety coverage at USA TODAY is made possible in part by a
grant from the Masimo Foundation for Ethics, Innovation and Competition
in Healthcare. The Masimo Foundation does not provide editorial input.
TAIPEI (Taiwan News) — In
response to a request by the Philippine Department of Labor and
Employment (DOLE) to deport a Filipina caregiver for criticizing
President Rodrigo Duterte, Taiwan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA)
on Monday (April 27) rebuffed the request and said that she has the
right to freedom of speech.
On Saturday (April 25), Labor Attaché Fidel Macauyag announced
that a Filipina working as a caregiver in Taiwan's Yunlin County would
be deported for "the crime of cyber libel for [her] willful posting of
nasty and malevolent materials against President Duterte on Facebook,"
reported Rappler.
Macauyag said that the Philippine Overseas Labor Office (POLO) had
coordinated with the woman's broker and employer to arrange for her
deportation for violating Act No. 10175, commonly referred to as the
Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012.
That same day, Migrante International came to her defense, denouncing
what it described as harassment of the woman by DOLE and POLO. The
organization criticized both DOLE and the Manila Economic and Cultural
Office for "bootlicking" Duterte while ignoring the pleas of thousands
of "distressed, abused, stranded, and neglected OFWs needing to be
rescued and assisted."
MOFA on Monday stated that "Taiwan is a sovereign, independent
country where foreign workers enjoy 'citizen treatment,' and their
rights and interests are protected by relevant laws and regulations,
including freedom of speech, which should be respected by governments of
all countries," reported UDN.
It added that "no person or institution, in this case, has the right to
pressure her, her employer, or broker, nor shall she be deported
without consultations held between both governments."
The woman, who goes by the Facebook handle Linn Silawan, recently
posted a three-minute video on the social media platform in which she
complained about the harsh measures imposed by Duterte's government
during its lockdown to contain the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak
in the country. She questioned whether Duterte had thought through the
consequences of the government interventions, saying Filipinos "would
not die from the virus but from hunger," reported the Inquirer.
She complained about families being unable to receive remittances
and urged authorities “not to be too loyal to the President.” She
called on them to think of the welfare of their children and families
and to not "just think about the orders of the President."
If she is found guilty of violating the Cybercrime Prevention
Act, she could face a prison sentence of up to six months or a fine as
high as 250,000 pesos, according to Macauyag.
A representative from MECO told Taiwan News that it had not
received any instructions from the Philippine government on having the
woman deported.
Un tribunale accusa Bill Gates e Soros: “Hanno creato il Covid”
Secondo
un tribunale del paese andino il virus sarebbe stato creato ad hoc da
personaggi di spicco quali Gates, Soros e Rockefeller per sfruttare gli
aspetti economici della pandemia
LIMA (Perù) - Un tribunale peruviano ha affermato che il COVID-19 è un'invenzione delle "élite criminale mondiale" composta, secondo i magistrati di questa corte, da miliardari come George Soros, la famiglia Rockefeller e l'uomo d'affari Bill Gates. A
giustificazione del ritardo nell'emissione della sentenza, la Camera di
appello penale di Chincha e Pisco ha assicurato che la pandemia aveva
una natura "imprevedibile" tranne che per i suoi creatori, "che l'hanno gestita e continuano a dirigerla con estrema segretezza all'interno dei loro ambienti e multinazionali ". Così, il tribunale collegiale della Corte superiore di giustizia di Ica,
composto dai giudici Tito Gallegos, Luis Leguía e Tony Changaray, ha
cercato di scusarsi per il ritardo nell'affrontare il ricorso di un
imputato che ha chiesto l'annullamento della sua detenzione preventiva
ma il cui ordine è stato rallentato dalla pandemia.
"Covid creato dalle élite criminali che dominano il mondo"
"Nessun governo mondiale, persone fisiche e giuridiche, né
la difesa dell'imputato può sostenere che questa pandemia ha la qualità
di 'prevedibile', ad eccezione dei creatori del nuovo ordine mondiale
come Bill Gates, Soros, Rockefeller, ecc.", si legge nella sentenza pubblicata sul portale LP Law. Sottolineando che il Coronavirus sia stato "creato dalle élite criminali che dominano il mondo", la Camera di appello penale superiore di Chincha e Pisco ha fatto eco a una delle tante teorie del complotto
emerse l'anno scorso a seguito della pandemia. Nello specifico, il
documento cita l'investitore finanziario George Soros, il co-fondatore
di Microsoft Bill Gates e la famiglia miliardaria Rockefeller, che
accusa di "gestire" e "continuare a dirigere" il virus nel "nuovo ordine mondiale".
Con la comparsa del covid-19, la quantità di disinformazione è
aumentata vertiginosamente e, nonostante il fatto che l'Organizzazione
mondiale della sanità (OMS) abbia già confermato a maggio che il virus
aveva un'origine animale e ne abbia negato la creazione in laboratorio,
le ipotesi alternative hanno continuato a circolare.Fin dall'inizio,
queste teorie includevano discorsi sulla creazione del virus da parte di
aziende farmaceutiche desiderose di aumentare i loro benefici economici
e persino trame Bill Gates e Soros come promotori di un presunto piano
per controllare la popolazione attraverso di vaccini e 5G.