From the Document: "After examining all available intelligence reporting and other information, though, the IC [Intelligence Community] remains divided on the most likely origin of COVID-19 [coronavirus disease 2019]. All agencies assess that two hypotheses are plausible: natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident.  Four IC elements and the National Intelligence Council assess with low confidence that the initial SARS-CoV-2 [severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2] infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to an animal infected with it or a close progenitor virus--a virus that probably would be more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2. These analysts give weight to China's officials' lack of foreknowledge, the numerous vectors for natural exposure, and other factors.  One IC element assesses with moderate confidence that the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. These analysts give weight to the inherently risky nature of work on coronaviruses.  Analysts at three IC elements remain unable to coalesce around either explanation without additional information, with some analysts favoring natural origin, others a laboratory origin, and some seeing the hypotheses as equally likely.  Variations in analytic views largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh intelligence reporting and scientific publications and intelligence and scientific gaps. The IC judges they will be unable to provide a more definitive explanation for the origin of COVID-19 unless new information allows them to determine the specific pathway for initial natural contact with an animal or to determine that a laboratory in Wuhan was handling SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor virus before COVID-19 emerged."
Office of the Director of National Intelligence: https://www.dni.gov/