[yucky]

Out of curiosity, what is the supporting evidence for the alternate "zoonotic transmission" theory? As far as I know there isn't any.

We know for a fact the virus was present in the Wuhan lab.

We know for a fact it hasn't been identified in bats in the wild.

Is there a different theory as to the origins?

[wrp]

> ...what is the supporting evidence for the alternate "zoonotic transmission" theory?

This is a reasonable question and should be answered rather than downvoted. A study released a few months ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30487145) found that two strains of SARS-CoV-2 emerged at the Wuhan market in November-December 2019, Lineage A and Lineage B. From the submitted article, "it’s extremely improbable that two distinct lineages of SARS-CoV-2 could have been derived from a laboratory and then coincidentally ended up at the market."

[boxed]

It existed in the lab because it was the lab that collected samples from the wild bats. So by definition you are incorrect.

[yucky]

Are you familiar with Gain of Function? The virii in question were not the original strains found in bats. To this day, the original COVID-19 virus has never been recovered from a bat or from any wet market.

The fact is there was never any evidence to support it.

[scotty79]

Well... Only the fact that every human virus ever came to us through zoonotic transmission.

So it having unnatural origin is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence.

[xdennis]

> every human virus ever came to us through zoonotic transmission

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Russian_flu

[scotty79]

> Genetic analysis and several unusual characteristics of the 1977 Russian flu have prompted many researchers to speculate that the virus was released to the public through a laboratory accident or resulted from a live-vaccine trial escape.

Speculate. Covid shows how easy it is to do just that even if you have current knowledge.

It's not impossible that origin is other than zoonotic however it's very unlikely because that exactly how (nearly?) all viruses came to us.

[yucky]

You should read the article, and the sources contained therein.

[scotty79]

I already read articles like that over last two years. They started popping up pretty much immediately. And their content didn't change over time. Still just hearsay and tugging on heart's strings.

The problem I have with lab leak idea is not so much that it's not proven, but that it's not falsifiable. You can't prove it's wrong because someone can always tell "maybe they covered it better than we thought!".