[awb]

> Just because it's on the opinion page doesn't mean it's false.

No, but if it’s a red flag that the author has an agenda, or wants to jump to a conclusion without gathering enough evidence required for the news section.

> It has way more credibility than some random virologist's claim about WIV safety on Reddit. Period.

Reddit is the medium of distribution, as it was intended as kind of a springboard to an AMA. Could have been posted on Medium, Substack, etc. For what it’s worth, he is a published virologist: https://scholar.google.com.co/citations?user=8wCwbNUAAAAJ&hl...

I’m not saying he has the right take (I don’t know enough about virology to evaluate his content), just that it was a widely circulated, comprehensive and researched piece of content about the lab leak theory, as were the other two articles.

In a sea of half-thought out opinions and conspiracy theories these 3 articles actually spent incredible amounts of time and published evidence (on both sides of the theory) that can be analyzed and debated in depth.