Nearly two-thirds of British scientists think China has not been open and transparent about the origins of Covid, and more than a quarter think the pandemic leaked from a Chinese laboratory.
However, the majority (67 percent) believe the virus is of natural origin and not deliberately engineered.
The results of the survey, conducted by the Telegraph and Censuswide, reveal a divide in the scientific community over how the coronavirus pandemic emerged.
Very few scientists believe the virus is not natural (16 percent) and most experts apparently subscribe to one of two theories: either that the virus spreads directly from animals to humans, probably through the Huanan seafood market, or that an animal virus is being studied in the United States. the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was leaked intentionally or accidentally.
An anonymous survey of almost 200 lecturers across all disciplines at British universities found that among the 125 people who responded, there was a wide split between the 'lab leak' and 'non-lab leak' schools of thought, with 41 percent in favor of the former.
More than a third responded with 'no opinion' or 'I'd rather not say'.
The origins of the coronavirus pandemic have been a divisive topic since the first cases emerged in Wuhan in late 2019. Vicious arguments broke out between warring factions of scientists, often shutting down constructive debate.
Conversation about the possibility of a lab leak was largely shut down in the middle of the lockdown after a group of scientists wrote in the Lancet that they "strongly condemned conspiracy theories."
Ongoing investigations, including a US Congressional investigation, have raised concerns about the biosafety of the WIV, which was known to store and work on coronaviruses before the pandemic.
Professor James Wood, head of the department of veterinary medicine at the University of Cambridge, said that although the sample size was small, it made a "useful" distinction between the two laboratory leak scenarios.
The story continues
"There has been a lot of confusion or confusion between the laboratory leak hypothesis and whether this was an artificially constructed virus. This research takes these separate questions apart," he said.
Lab theory 'plausible'
Dr. Simon Clarke, associate professor of cellular microbiology at the University of Reading, added: "It always seemed entirely plausible to me that Covid escaped from a laboratory, but that doesn't mean this was intentional or the result of nefarious activity.
"Laboratories like those in Wuhan routinely collect and store samples of the pathogens they study, so Covid could have been collected from a wild animal, brought to the lab for research, but accidentally released due to a biosafety lapse."
However, Professor Ravindra Gupta, an expert in clinical microbiology at the University of Cambridge, said the prevailing belief is that the SARS-CoV-2 virus emerged naturally.
"The situation among scientists is that people say it is most likely natural through the market; there were a lot of animals there and there was evidence of the SARS virus, so most likely that is what happened.
"But we cannot ignore that laboratory work in Wuhan took place at unsafe containment levels. It is possible that it was leaked from a Chinese laboratory and that should be taken seriously."
Scientists also condemned China for its role in the pandemic, with two-thirds agreeing that "China has not been open and transparent about the origins of Covid-19".
Prof Wood said the slow release of information from China has likely increased uncertainty about the origins of Covid.
"Combined with the fact that retrospective investigations into outbreaks often fail to identify specific epidemic sources, even when there is full official openness, it is not clear that further research now will ever be able to identify a source," he added.
Professor Clarke agreed, saying: "We probably missed the opportunity to investigate whether that actually happened."
'China has behaved badly all along'
Professor Lawrence Gostin, a leading university professor at Georgetown University in the US, and director of the O'Neill Institute, a WHO collaborating center on global health law, said China had "behaved badly during the pandemic".
"The country has not been a good global citizen and may be partly responsible for the failure of an early response to contain the virus," Prof. Gostin said.
"China was late in reporting the outbreak to WHO, passed misleading information to WHO suggesting limited human-to-human transmission, and blocked any attempt at an independent scientific investigation into the origins of Covid .
"Because of China, the world may never know the full truth. After the entire world has suffered from Covid-19, China's actions were reprehensible."
Controversial experiments
Scientists were also questioned about the usefulness and risks of gain-of-function laboratory experiments, which take a virus and give it enhanced capabilities, sometimes involving mortality and transmissibility.
A third of respondents (34 percent) thought these experiments were necessary to prevent future pandemics, but the same proportion said they "risk causing future pandemics."
"They can only be justified if they have significant and immediate public health benefits," Prof. Gupta said, adding that they "must be very tightly regulated."
"I think the research shows that people believe in the ability of science to answer questions, but some of those experiments come with a risk."
Prof Gupta, who is also co-chair of the Independent Task Force on Research with Pandemic Risks, recently presented a report to the UN, which stated that Covid could have been caused by a research-related incident.
"This research is an independent confirmation of what we have just published," he told The Telegraph.
"Scientists say anonymously that they agree with the report's findings. There are risks associated with doing this work, but this type of work is also essential to save lives in the future."
However, Richard Ebright, professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University in the US, disagrees and believes that gain-of-function research "has zero civilian applications".
He said: "It provides no information useful for preventing pandemics and no information useful for responding to pandemics. It is not necessary for, and does not contribute to, the development of any vaccine or therapeutic agent."
Virologists at the WIV have previously rejected claims of a laboratory leak.
