of virology. joining us on the phone this morning is a reporter with the washington examiner who reports on the justice department. jerry donley b, what evidence does dr. redfield have of this? guest: much of the evidence would be circumstantial evidence but there is some circumstantial evidence that it would have come from an accidental escape from the wuhan institute of virology. we know from state department cable back in 2018 that the u.s. was concerned about biosafety. they lacked standards for a level 4 lab dealing with highly contagious and dangerous viruses.

and the state department released a declassified stat sheet in mid-january laying out some more interesting details, data research being conducted at the wuhan lab, secret military experience -- experiments. the wuhan lab apparently collaborated with the chinese military and the lab itself also apparently was in possession of and studying covid-19's closest known genetic relative as well. so circumstantial evidence, to be sure, and certainly not proven in any way. that sort of evidence does suggest it is a plausible hypothesis worth investigating further. it is kind of an interesting and

disappointing thing that the who team would say it is not worth looking into further. host: why would dr. redfield say accidental release? guest: that's a great question. the intelligence community did weigh in on this in sort of a railway last may, -- rare way last may and basically said that the intelligence community largely agreed that this was not a man-made bioweapon or that sort of thing. but that they were taking seriously the possibility, of course, that it was natural in origin, that it came from some zoo not ask source jumping from animals to humans, but that the idea was also taken seriously, the possibility that there was an accidental leak. because it looks like that lab was studied -- studying some

dangerous viruses. it is known for its vast coronavirus research. it is known for seemingly having some lax biosafety standards and if the u.s. intelligence is correct on this, it has also been engaging in secret experiments with the chinese military and data function research which is research that is done that increases the transmissibility or lethality of a virus with the purpose of hoping to find vaccines for such a virus. but there is always the chance that a virus could escape and viruses have escaped from chinese labs before. sars, in fact, most recently has been known to have done that. host: what evidence to the world health organization .2 when they say that it is most likely the scenario that the virus came from bats to humans?

guest: i believe that the theory that they have been saying is most likely, and they have been saying this since they came back from their heavily stage-managed trip back in february, they have been saying that their most likely scenario is a jump from bats to some other animal source to humans. but they have, they looked at the wuhan seafood market, they have tested a bunch of animals and so far, there is no direct evidence of whatever that intermediary source may have been, and they have not found the bat that may have been the reservoir as well. a lot of this does just seem like it bit of guesswork at the

moment and it is important to keep in mind that this who study was done in collaboration with chinese government scientists and chinese government scientists were weighing in on the final report. host: is there any entity doing an investigation about the origins, getting access to chinese officials, but not in this way of a joint collaboration like the who? guest: unfortunately, there is not. that has simply not happened. you know, china, from very early on in the pandemic, the chinese government tried to silence doctors, they were worried about what was happening, silence whistleblowers, destroy viral samples, refused to let the cdc in on the ground.

they did not report what was going on properly through the international health regulations that they were required to do. and they really have, then, for the past years, forded a true, -- thwarted a true, independent investigations of this joint study is the closest that we have. but it can't really be said that it was truly independent, and they really did not get access to the sort of data and they were not able to talk freely to the people that they really would need to truly understand what was happening in the early days of the pandemic in late 2019. host: you can follow more of jerry dunleavy's report on the washington examiner website.