Thread by @GidMK

This is a bizarre take. The evidence has stayed precisely the same - natural origin very likely, lab leak thus far entirely unproven and a very low chance

The rest is mostly misconceptions caused by reading only sensationalist headlines

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1397160688284536842

There is an excellent and comprehensive thread on the issue here, but the basic point is that experts pretty much universally agree that a natural origin is by far the most likely explanation

https://twitter.com/MoNscience/status/1396240581651742724?s=20

It is POSSIBLE that there was a lab leak and THIS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED, but it is also only a very SMALL possibility and certainly not more likely than a natural explanation

The problem is when experts say that something is POSSIBLE the headlines scream that it is LIKELY, which leads to misconceptions such as the above

For example, here is a paper by some pre-eminent researchers saying that the lab leak theory should be examined but noting that the WHO has so far classified the idea as "extremely unlikely"

science.sciencemag.org/content/372/65…

The problem is that we haven't investigated a lab leak enough to say with any certainty that it is not what happened, but that is ~not the same~ as making it more probable

Some more excellent reading on the topic

https://twitter.com/MoNscience/status/1397696019933143040?s=19