Monthly Archives: June 2022

The government is twisting science and mangling the concept of natural to force gene-edited foods, unlabelled, onto our plates.

Environment secretary George Eustice promotes gene editing as a precision scienceone that is all benefits, no downside. Much of the media has fallen for this reassuring but thoroughly fallacious sales pitch, when in fact genome editing is just another form of risky genetic engineering.

Gene editing isnt just a single snip or tweak. As well as any intended genetic modification, it invariably involves large numbers of unintended alterationsto the plant or animal in question.It can also entail multiple cuts into an organisms DNA and the insertion of foreign genes.

For instance, Professor Cathie Martin, who led the development of the gene-edited tomato that could be the first crop of its kind to go on sale in the UK, told The National thatthe process did insert foreign genes that were removed before the final plant was put to market.

And be in no doubt that, as the European Court of Justice has ruled, gene editing does indeed create genetically modified organisms (GMOs).

Yet if the UK government gets away with its new legislation, it would allow plants created using foreign genes to be classified as natural and they will be exempt from regulation and labelling.

This should alarm us. A recent experiment in the US serves as a timely warning of how this volatile technology produces unpredictable, negative and irreversible results.

Researchers at Georgia State University just reported on how their gene editing experiment to reduce aggression in hamsters misfired when their precision alterations instead bred ultra-vicious rodents.In other words, the scientists anticipated a favourable outcome, but got the opposite result.

In the realm of food, the most obvious risks of gene editing are the production of toxins and allergens that could wreak havoc with human and animal health. Who has an appetite for that?

Last years government consultation found 88% of citizens dont want gene-edited foods treated differently to other genetically modified products.

Is it any wonder that, very sensibly, no UK supermarket is willing to say it will stock gene-edited food?

Read more from the original source:
Gene-edited foods shouldn't be enabled in the UK while risks are ignored - The Grocer

The emergence of CRISPR technology, which can be used for gene modification and editing, has been revolutionary for the science community and research field due to its applications for disease and health. Additionally, combining nanotechnology and CRISPR can hold tremendous potential for widening the opportunities for versatile applications, from diseases to agriculture.

Image Credit:Yurchanka Siarhei/Shutterstock.com

CRISPR is an acronym for clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and is a critical tool that can be used to find specific DNA within cells for the purpose of gene editing; this can also include turning a gene on or off without modifying the sequence.

Conventional gene therapy methods have taken researchers years to gain traction and can be quite expensive; however, the emergence of CRISPR has revolutionized this process into a cheaper and relatively simpler strategy for gene editing.

CRISPR Cas9 proteins found in bacteria can be programmed to find and bind to targeted DNA sequences by providing a complimentary piece of RNA, which can guide the tool for its purpose. Once found, the Cas9 protein can cut the target DNA, which during repair, can lead to mutations and the disablement and overall dysfunction of the gene.

Other types of applications for CRISPR can also include replacing dysfunctional genes, turning genes on and off, instead of modifying the DNA, and even modifying single nucleotide bases within the DNA sequence from one letter to another. However, these can have varying levels of difficulties in practice.

CRISPR/Cas9 delivery can be used for innovative cancer therapy; however, this would require the gene-editing tool to be delivered directly into target cancer cells, requiring the passing of physical barriers and maintaining functionality.

The strategies for delivery of the CRISPR system can include physical and viral vectors.

The physical vectors can include (i) microinjection, (ii) electroporation, and (iii) hydrodynamic delivery. These delivery methods have demonstrated efficiency within in vitro application; however, in vivo results have been more challenging.

Viral vectors have also been subject to challenges within in vivo applications, with limitations comprising immunogenic responses, high production expense, limited capacity with cargo packaging, as well as having possible effects outside of the target area.

Research into non-viral vectors and the possible use of nanotechnology to advance delivery has been explored as a result.

Non-viral nanotechnology-based delivery methods may include the use of nanocarriers, such as polymers, lipids, silica nanoparticles and metallic nanoparticles.

These have been revered for various applications in different fields due to their versatility and have also been used within cancer therapy due to advantages such as having low immunogenicity and a high cargo delivery capacity.

The high potential of the CRISPR/Cas9 system within clinical applications has been recognized globally by researchers, evident from 18 CRISPR-based clinical trials that have been launched since 2016, with almost half being a type of immunotherapy.

Additionally, the use of nanotechnology for furthering this gene-editing tool for diverse applications such as cancer, HPV treatment, as well as agriculture may advance the field of science and healthcare on a global scale.

A previous clinical trial has demonstrated the use of CRISPR/Cas9 on the human papillomavirus (HPV) that is associated with cervical cancer, where the correlated genes, E6 and E7, were destroyed to inhibit cancer cell proliferation and overall survival.

However, while trials have shown effective results, human safety remains a priority, with off-target effects and delivery being a concern for the CRISPR/Cas9 system.

The use of a lipid nanoparticle-based CRISPR/Cas9 system has recently been applied to treat transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR), becoming the first clinical data of therapeutic gene editing within patients. This nanotechnology incorporation into CRISPR gene editing has demonstrated the potential of using nanotechnology to advance the treatment of genetic disorders through innovative delivery.

With the global CRISPR market being valued at $846.2 million in 2019 and estimations of $10,825.1 million by the year 2030, at a compound annual growth rate of 26.86%, this gene-editing tool is predicted to have a significant impact worldwide.

The potential of editing the genome to modify human disease and disorders may be a tangible reality in the near future, with clinical trials already launched and set in motion.

Additionally, the use of nanotechnology for this advanced gene-editing tool may aid in satisfying concerns over have off-target effects due to the precise targetability characteristic for which this innovative field is known.

The versatility of nanotechnology enables the possibility of aiding the field of medicine as well as other fields, such as agriculture. This is critical as CRISPR systems also face delivery challenges within plants and with the use of nanomaterials, these may be solved.

With the growth of the global population, the essential survival of plants has become even more imperative to sustain the global demand for food, therapeutics, and bioenergy.

Genetic engineering methods are not only significant for medicine, but also for one of the most critical elements of life, namely, plants, to ensure species survival, higher yield, and nutrient density.

Nanotechnology uses for interdisciplinary applications have become a common theme and the opportunities for advancing the lives and health of humans are a critical component for research. The use of nanotechnology-based CRISPR can only advance the field further, providing promising solutions for current challenges.

Demirer, G., Silva, T., Jackson, C., Thomas, J., W. Ehrhardt, D., Rhee, S., Mortimer, J. and Landry, M., 2021. Nanotechnology to advance CRISPRCas genetic engineering of plants.Nature Nanotechnology, 16(3), pp.243-250. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-021-00854-y

Markets, R., 2022.Outlook on the CRISPR Gene Editing Global Market to 2030 - Analysis and Forecasts. [online] GlobeNewswire News Room. Available at: https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/02/08/2171285/0/en/Outlook-on-the-CRISPR-Gene-Editing-Global-Market-to-2030-Analysis-and-Forecasts.html

New Scientist. 2022.CRISPR. [online] Available at: https://www.newscientist.com/definition/what-is-crispr/

Uddin, F., Rudin, C. and Sen, T., 2020. CRISPR Gene Therapy: Applications, Limitations, and Implications for the Future.Frontiers in Oncology, 10. Available at: 10.3389/fonc.2020.01387

Xu, X., Liu, C., Wang, Y., Koivisto, O., Zhou, J., Shu, Y. and Zhang, H., 2021. Nanotechnology-based delivery of CRISPR/Cas9 for cancer treatment.Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, 176, p.113891. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addr.2021.113891

Disclaimer: The views expressed here are those of the author expressed in their private capacity and do not necessarily represent the views of AZoM.com Limited T/A AZoNetwork the owner and operator of this website. This disclaimer forms part of the Terms and conditions of use of this website.

Continue reading here:
Nanotechnology and CRISPR; Opportunities and Outlook - AZoNano

Sharma, A. et al. Global trends in pesticides: A looming threat and viable alternatives. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safe 201, 110812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.110812 (2020).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Morillo, E. & Villaverde, J. Advanced technologies for the remediation of pesticide-contaminated soils. Sci. Total Environ. 586, 576597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.02.020 (2017).

ADS CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Bind, V. & Kumar, A. Pesticides toxicity may causes adverse effects to our health-a review. MOJ Toxicol. 5, 1718 (2019).

Google Scholar

Giordano, G. et al. Organophosphorus insecticides chlorpyrifos and diazinon and oxidative stress in neuronal cells in a genetic model of glutathione deficiency. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 219(23), 181189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.taap.2006.09.016 (2007).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Wang, C. et al. Enantioselective interaction with acetylcholinesterase of an organophosphate insecticide fenamiphos. Chiral. Pharmacol. Biol. Chem. Conseq. Mole. Asym. 22(6), 612617. https://doi.org/10.1002/chir.20800 (2010).

CAS Article Google Scholar

European Commission implementing regulation (EU) 2020/18. Off J Eur U 13.1.2020: L7/14-L7/16. http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2020/18/oj (2020).

Lee, W. et al. Pesticide use and colorectal cancer risk in the Agricultural Health Study. Int. J. Cancer. 121(2), 339346. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.22635 (2007).

CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Alavanja, M. C. et al. A Pesticides and lung cancer risk in the agricultural health study cohort. Am. J. Epidemiol. 160(9), 876885. https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwh290 (2004).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Madrigal, J. M. et al. Residential exposure to carbamate, organophosphate, and pyrethroid insecticides in house dust and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Environ. Res. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111501 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Some organophosphate insecticides and herbicides. PMID:31829533 (2017).

Guyton, K. Z. et al. International agency for research on cancer monograph working group ILF. Carcinogenicity of tetrachlorvinphos, parathion, malathion, diazinon, and glyphosate. Lancet Oncol. 16(5), 490491. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70134-8 (2015).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Koureas, M., Tsakalof, A., Tsatsakis, A. & Hadjichristodoulou, C. Systematic review of biomonitoring studies to determine the association between exposure to organophosphorus and pyrethroid insecticides and human health outcomes. Toxicol. Lett. 210(2), 155168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2011.10.007 (2012).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Chen, S. et al. Exposure to pyrethroid pesticides and the risk of childhood brain tumors in East China. Environ Pollut 218, 11281134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2016.08.066 (2016).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Kannarkat, G. T. et al. Common genetic variant association with altered HLA expression, synergy with pyrethroid exposure, and risk for Parkinsons disease: An observational and casecontrol study. NPJ. Parkinsons Disease 1, 19. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjparkd.2015.2 (2015).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Paul, K. C. et al. Organophosphate pesticides and PON1 L55M in Parkinsons disease progression. Environ. Int. 107, 7581. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2017.06.018 (2017).

CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Javeres, M. N. L. et al. Analysis of PON1 gene polymorphisms (rs662 and rs854560) and inflammatory markers in organophosphate pesticides exposed cohorts from two distinct populations. Environ. Res. 191, 110210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.110210 (2020).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Li, H. L., Liu, D. P. & Liang, C. C. Paraoxonase gene polymorphisms, oxidative stress, and diseases. J. Mol. Med. 81(12), 766779. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-003-0481-4 (2003).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Czajka, M. et al. Organophosphorus pesticides can influence the development of obesity and type 2 diabetes with concomitant metabolic changes. Environ. Res. 178, 108685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2019.108685 (2019).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Gutirrez-Jara, J. P., Crdova-Lepe, F. D., Muoz-Quezada, M. T. & Chowell, G. Susceptibility to organophosphates pesticides and the development of infectious-contagious respiratory diseases. J. Theor. Biol. 488, 110133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtbi.2019.110133 (2020).

MathSciNet CAS Article PubMed MATH Google Scholar

Abreu-Villaca, Y. & Levin, E. D. Developmental neurotoxicity of succeeding generations of insecticides. Environ. Int. 99, 5577. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2016.11.019 (2017).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Demirel, T. et al. Association of paraoxonase (PON1) polymorphisms and activity with colorectal cancer predisposition. Biotechnol. Biotechnol. Equip. 35, 232238. https://doi.org/10.1080/13102818.2020.1867006 (2021).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Abolhassani, M. et al. Organochlorine and organophosphorous pesticides may induce colorectal cancer; A case-control study. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 178, 168177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2019.04.030 (2019).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Littlefield, J. W. NIH 3T3 cell line. Science 218(4569), 214216. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.218.4569.214.c (1982).

ADS CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Kahl, V. F. S. et al. Role of PON1, SOD2, OGG1, XRCC1, and XRCC4 polymorphisms on modulation of DNA damage in workers occupationally exposed to pesticides. Ecotox. Environ. Saf. 159, 164171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.04.052 (2018).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Medina-Daz, I. M. et al. Downregulation of human paraoxonase 1 (PON1) by organophosphate pesticides in HepG2 cells. Environ. Toxicol. 32(2), 490500. https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.22253 (2017).

ADS CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Dardiotis, E. et al. Paraoxonase-1 genetic polymorphisms in organophosphate metabolism. Toxicology 411, 2431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2018.10.012 (2019).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Mackness, M. & Mackness, B. Human paraoxonase-1 (PON1): Gene structure and expression, promiscuous activities and multiple physiological roles. Gene 567, 1221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2015.04.088 (2015).

CAS Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Tsatsakis, A. M., Zafiropoulos, A., Tzatzarakis, M. N., Tzanakakis, G. N. & Kafatos, A. Relation of PON1 and CYP1A1 genetic polymorphisms to clinical findings in a cross-sectional study of a Greek rural population professionally exposed to pesticides. Toxicol. Lett. 186, 6672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.toxlet.2008.10.018 (2009).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Costa, L. G., Cole, T. B., Vitalone, A. & Furlong, C. E. Measurement of paraoxonase (PON1) status as a potential biomarker of susceptibility to organophosphate toxicity. Clin. Chim. Acta 352(12), 3747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cccn.2004.09.019 (2005).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Kaur, G., Jain, A. K. & Kaur, S. CYP/PON genetic variations as determinant of organophosphate pesticides toxicity. J. Genet. 96, 187201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12041-017-0741-7 (2017).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Szmen, B., Peker, , Kaya, ., Erkan, M. & Szmen, E. Y. Markers of long-term exposure to organophosphorus pesticides in farmers who work in viniculture and tobacco production in Turkey. Toxicol. Mech. Methods 17(7), 379384. https://doi.org/10.1080/15376510601094115 (2007).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Imran, I., Saleem, S., Azhar, A. & Zehra, S. Pyrethroid exposure: as determinant of CYP1A1 and GSTP1 genetic variations in occupationally exposed Sindh farmers. Biologia https://doi.org/10.1007/s11756-021-00698-w (2021).

Article Google Scholar

Wadani, Z. H., Azam, I., Irfan, M. & Fatmi, Z. Pesticides use and impaired lung function among male agricultural farmers in rural Sindh, Pakistan. Asia Pac J Public Health https://doi.org/10.1177/10105395211065647 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Ahmed, H., Sharif, A., Bakht, S., Javed, F. & Hassan, W. Persistent organic pollutants and neurological disorders: from exposure to preventive interventions. In Environmental Contaminants and Neurological Disorders (pp. 231247). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66376-6_11 (2021).

Ali, T. et al. Pesticide genotoxicity in cotton picking women in Pakistan evaluated using comet assay. Drug Chem. Toxicol. 41(2), 213220. https://doi.org/10.1080/01480545.2017.1343342 (2018).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Sandal, S. & Yilmaz, B. Genotoxic effects of chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, endosulfan and 2,4-D on human peripheral lymphocytes cultured from smokers and nonsmokers. Environ. Toxicol. 26, 433442. https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.20569 (2011).

ADS CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Ambali, S. F. & Aliyu, M. B. Short-term sensorimotor and cognitive changes induced by acute chlorpyrifos exposure in Wistar rats: Ameliorative effect of vitamin E. Pharmacologia 3(2), 3138. https://doi.org/10.5567/pharmacologia2012.31.38 (2012).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Badr, A. M. Organophosphate toxicity: Updates of Malathion potential toxic effects in mammals and potential treatments. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 27, 2603626057. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-020-08937-4 (2020).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Ozkan, U. et al. Effects of intralipid and caffeic acid phenethyl ester on neurotoxicity, oxidative stress, and acetylcholinesterase activity in acute chlorpyriphos intoxication. Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 7(4), 837 (2014).

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Mehmood, Y., Arshad, M., Mahmood, N., Kchele, H. & Kong, R. Occupational hazards, health costs, and pesticide handling practices among vegetable growers in Pakistan. Environ. Res 200, 111340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111340 (2021).

CAS Article PubMed Google Scholar

Berridge, M. V., Herst, P. M. & Tan, A. S. Tetrazolium dyes as tools in cell biology: new insights into their cellular reduction. Biotech. Ann. Rev. 11, 127152. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1387-2656(05)11004-7 (2005).

CAS Article Google Scholar

Mathew, C. G. P. The isolation of high molecular weight eukaryotic DNA in nucleic acids methods in molecular Biology. Springer 9, 3134. https://doi.org/10.1385/0-89603-064-4:31 (1984).

ADS Article Google Scholar

Fong, C. S., Cheng, C. W. & Wu, R. M. Pesticides exposure and genetic polymorphism of Paraoxonase in the susceptibility of Parkinsons disease. Acta Neurol. Taiwan 14(2), 5560 (2005).

PubMed Google Scholar

See the original post here:
Insights of OPs and PYR cytotoxic potential Invitro and genotoxic impact on PON1 genetic variant among exposed workers in Pakistan | Scientific...

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Ambys Medicines, a company pioneering cell-replacement therapies for patients with liver disease, today announced that data from its universal hepatocyte program will be presented at the 2022 International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) Annual Meeting, which will be held June 15-18, 2022, in San Francisco and virtually. Ambys will present proof-of-concept data on its genetically engineered hypoimmunogenic human hepatocytes during an oral session.

We look forward to presenting data on our universal hepatocyte program that demonstrate the efficient ex vivo genetic engineering of primary human hepatocytes in a metabolic liver disease model using a range of gene editing and delivery technologies, said Markus Grompe, M.D., Founder and Chief Scientific Officer of Ambys Medicines. Were progressing multiple liver cell replacement therapies in development, including our universal human hepatocyte therapy which eliminates the need for immune suppression. These preclinical findings show proof of concept for our engineered hepatocyte replacement approach for severe liver diseases.

Presentation details follow:

Title: Rescue of a Metabolic Liver Disease Model by Genetically Engineered Hypoimmunogenic Human HepatocytesSession: Biotech, Pharma and Academia Bringing Stem Cells to PatientsDate & Time: Thursday, June 16, 2022, at 6:10 p.m. PTRoom: 2004, Level 2

About Ambys Medicines

Ambys Medicines is focused on pioneering cell replacement therapies for patients with liver failure. Ambyss proprietary platform enables the company to be the first and only company able to develop and manufacture functional human hepatocytes at scale. Our scientific approach has the potential to fundamentally transform the treatment paradigm for patients with acute and chronic liver failure and genetic diseases of the liver. Our lead program, AMI-918, is a hepatocyte replacement cell therapy in development to restore lost hepatic function. Beyond AMI-918, we are building a pipeline of next-generation modified hepatocytes that will rapidly expand the range of treatable patient populations. Learn more at ambys.com and follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, and Instagram.

Read the original post:
Ambys Medicines to Present Data from Universal Human Hepatocyte Program at the 2022 ISSCR Annual Meeting - Business Wire

Thus far, researchers have not identified ancestral viruses that could have plausibly given rise to the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes COVID-19so says a new report from the Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins (SAGO) of Novel Pathogens set up by the World Health Organization (WHO).

The report, however, notes that "the current available data on the closest related SARS-like viruses and susceptibility of many animal species to SARS-CoV-2 suggest a zoonotic source." Assuming a natural outbreak, horseshoe bats are a likely reservoir of the virus in the wild, although it could also have passed through an unknown intermediate species before infecting humans.

An alternative hypothesis is that the COVID-19 virus somehow escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, whose researchers were known to be experimenting with coronaviruses. Although three of the 27 members of the SAGO objected to consideration of the "lab leak" theory for the possible origin of the COVID-19 virus, the report states that "it remains important to consider all reasonable scientific data that is available either through published or other official sources to evaluate the possibility of the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 into the human population through a laboratory incident."

Interestingly, a Chinese team reported the results of testing 1380 samples taken from the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, where the outbreak was first identified. None of the samples from 188 live animals sold as meat detected the presence of the COVID-19 virus, but the researchers did find it in 73 samples from the ground, sewer wells, and various containers. "Skeptics of the natural origin theory maintain the market cluster could merely be a superspreader event touched off when a person infected with a lab-escaped coronavirus visited it," noted Science back in February.

Further investigation into the lab leak hypothesis would require that the Chinese government provide "access to and review the evidence of all laboratory (both in vitro and in vivo studies) with coronaviruses including SARS-CoV-2-related viruses or close ancestors." Going forward, the SAGO would like to obtain more information about "the nature of the studies performed before the first reported COVID-19 cases in Wuhan and whether they involved reverse engineering or gain-of-function, genetic manipulation or animal studies with strains of SARS-like CoV."

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus sent two letters in February to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and National Health Commission head Ma Xiaowei asking for any updates with respect to ongoing studies focused on the origins of the COVID-19 virus. However, the SAGO report notes that the Chinese government and researchers have "not provided any information related to studies conducted evaluating the laboratory hypotheses as a possible introduction into the human population."

The SAGO reports that it will remain open to "any and all scientific evidence that becomes available in the future to allow for comprehensive testing of all reasonable hypotheses," including the lab leak hypothesis.

The Chinese government's continued stonewalling of independent investigations of the origin of the COVID-19 virus strongly suggests that it has something to hide.

See the original post:
COVID-19 'Lab Leak' Origin Theory Merits Further Investigation, Says New WHO Report - Reason