[rrrrrrrrrrrryan]

> The lab was nowhere near the site of what they were studying.

> The coronavirus strains came from a cave 600 miles away and brought to Wuhan for further study.

The best theory I've come across is that patient zero was a person collecting bats in caves for the lab in Wuhan. By all records, they wore woefully inadequate PPE (unlike the people in the lab itself who had well-established procedures).

This theory explains the jump from animal to human, the geographic origin, the reason why China didn't allow any outside investigations, and why most geneticists believe it likely had a zoological origin. (Yes, that last bit remains true no matter how badly the conspiracy theorists want it to be false.)

[ifyoubuildit]

> why most geneticists believe

Whenever I see a claim of this type, I always wonder how you back it up?

I'm not saying that most geneticists don't believe what you're saying, because I have no clue what most members of any profession believe about anything. I have plenty of gut feelings, but how do you go beyond that?

Did you mean most geneticists that you know? That you've seen articles from?

[DiogenesKynikos]

> The best theory I've come across is that patient zero was a person collecting bats in caves for the lab in Wuhan.

There are literally millions of people in China who live in close proximity to bats. You don't have to invoke the 1-in-a-million lab worker here (who will be much more careful than the other 999,999 people, anyways). There are literally people who go shovel bat poop out of caves for a living. Then there are all the millions of farmed animals that have contact with bats - this is how the original SARS got into people.

A lab worker getting infected in a cave and then going back to Wuhan is not the best theory. It's an extremely improbable explanation for the pandemic, when you realize just how much contact people and farmed animals have with bats.