In a 2024 survey of 168 experts (mostly epidemiologists and virologists), respondents on average assigned substantially higher probability to a zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2 (~77%) than to a lab-leak origin (~21%).
2 events · 1 assessment
Assessed Verified
verdict confidence 0.92
A 2024 survey of 168 experts — most of them epidemiologists and virologists — found that, on average, respondents judged a natural zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2 far more probable than a laboratory-leak origin, assigning roughly 77% probability to zoonosis versus about 21% to a lab leak (with the small remainder to other scenarios). The finding is well documented: it was reported in Science and is cited in standard reference summaries of the origins debate. Importantly, this reflects the balance of expert opinion, not a resolution of the underlying question — the survey itself showed meaningful dispersion, with a sizeable minority assigning substantial probability to non-zoonotic scenarios. The result speaks to what experts believe on average, which is a separate matter from whether zoonosis is in fact correct.
Claim entered the graph