The U.S. Department of Energy has updated its assessment of how the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus began spreading globally. The agency now believes a laboratory incident in China played a likely role in the emergence of COVID-19. This shift was reported by The Wall Street Journal, which cited sources familiar with a newly prepared classified intelligence document.
The new report outlines how different parts of the U.S. intelligence community evaluate the virus origin. The Department of Energy aligns with the FBI in suggesting that the virus most probably spread due to an accident at a Chinese laboratory. Prior to this update, the Department of Energy supported the theory that the virus originated in nature and was transmitted through natural means from a market in Wuhan in December 2019.
The assessment notes that the national intelligence community, along with four other agencies, continues to view natural transmission as a possible cause. Two additional members have not yet reached a conclusion. The Wall Street Journal emphasizes that the Department of Energy holds particular sway because it oversees the network of national biolaboratories that study viruses and biological agents. The latest intelligence indicates a change in its stance.
Sources familiar with the classified document described the lab-accident scenario as having a low degree of certainty, even as the Energy Department shifted its view. The FBI, which has long considered this pathway plausible since 2021, regards it with moderate certainty. The exact content of the new intelligence report was not disclosed in the publication, but it was noted that the Energy Department and the FBI arrived at their conclusions for different reasons. The identity of the other intelligence members who favored natural contamination was not revealed, while the CIA has not yet decided its position.
An anonymous intelligence contact confirmed the existence of an updated report on the virus origin. The document was reportedly handed to the contact and the White House, though Congress did not request it. Whether a declassified version will ever be released remains uncertain.
Following the WSJ report, the White House national security adviser stated that U.S. intelligence has not reached a final conclusion about the origin. The theory of a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology began circulating in the early months of the pandemic and has supporters across the political spectrum. Former President Donald Trump actively promoted the theory, but many proponents still believe the leak was unintentional and tied to security lapses.
A joint World Health Organization team that visited Wuhan in 2021 initially deemed the lab-leak scenario unlikely, but later clarified that it did not rule out the possibility of a laboratory-related origin. Beijing denies responsibility for the spread tied to the Wuhan virology center. Since 2021, Chinese media have suggested that the U.S. military may have introduced the virus to China in late 2019. Zhao Lijian, a Foreign Ministry spokesperson, echoed similar claims.
In December 2021, Xinhua published a report accusing the United States of bringing COVID-19 to China. The document presented circumstantial and direct assertions that cast doubt on a Chinese origin. It pointed to early antibodies found in a Illinois-based volunteer who had not traveled abroad, suggesting infection in early December 2019, before the first U.S. case was announced. A study of 24,000 blood samples cited by Chinese researchers indicated a 50 percent probability that initial infections occurred in several northeastern U.S. states between August and October 2019.
Beijing highlighted an incident at Fort Detrick in Maryland in July 2019 as indirect evidence for its narrative, noting subsequent outbreaks of pneumonia near the facility and linking them to SARS-like symptoms. The Russian Ministry of Defense later claimed that American scientists at Boston University developed an artificial coronavirus pathogen based on the Omicron strain, asserting a high lethality. These claims have been rejected by Western officials and scientists as unfounded or unverified without corroborating data.
The topic remains contentious, with multiple nations and institutions continuing to investigate the virus’s origins. Experts stress the importance of rigorous, transparent data sharing to reach a clear, evidence-based understanding that can guide future biosafety and public health measures.