Anyways, for those like me that like to be skeptical of connecting 15 different dots with no data, here's some good reporting on the "lab leak" controversy:
http://sciencebasedmedicine.org/the-...ov-2-revisited
And
http://www.latimes.com/business/stor...k-covid-origin
The evidence for the "lab leak" theory in its entirety, is China as a state actor lies (true), WIH is located in the same city the outbreak is likely to have occurred (true), and "gain of function" work on these coronaviruses was being done (not proven). The rest is complete bunk.
1) "The Furin site isn't seen on other betacoronaviruses" - yes it is
2) "there were sequences of nucleic acids that lead to four positively charged amino acids and that doesn't happen twice in a row nevermind four times in a row in nature" - 33% of the entire human genome would disagree
3) the lack of animal host is still a dumb sticking point. Ebola was discovered in 1976 and we still don't have an animal host. SARS took 14 years. I get the "they found the civets!" argument, but a) is you got SARS you ended up in hospital so contract tracing was easy, and b) they found some animals because the people all ending up in hospital at first almost exclusively worked with animals. That wasn't the case here because for every person in hospital there were likely 20 that never showed symptoms, 30 that barely had symptoms, and 40% that had normal seasonal flu like symptoms. How do you contact trace that?
4) "Three lab workers sought treatment for respiratory symptoms" - OK. During flu season. Out of hundreds of other workers. They didn't have antibodies for SARS Cov2. No one else was sick then, but to have 3 severely ill people, wouldn't you have to have dozens, if not hundreds more less sick people? And if those 3 were the origin, what are the chances that they got so sick when most people don't get that sick?
Where's this mountain? I keep getting references to it, but I still don't see it.