https://www.the-sun.com/news/13957239/spies-covid-lab-leak-wuhan-secret-probe/ [www the-sun com]

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz7vypq31z7o [www bbc com]

https://gnusocial.jp/url/4444359 [www reuters com]

I think the most likely scenario isn't "something we made escaped and caused a global outbreak", but "we collected samples from all over and one of those samples escaped and caused a global outbreak" ... despite not finding a natural origin after several years of searching.

The lack of a natural origin IS a strong pointer toward it being an experimental virus. But if you're experimenting with gain of function, you're probably going to look to make it more deadly also. And definitely so if you're making--as some have said--a biological warfare agent.

Even during the most deadly waves, something less than 3% of infectees required hospitalization and only a fraction of those died. And likewise, AFAIK, even China didn't have an effective preventative or cure at the time. IMO, a rapid spread, high death rate, and pre-existing vaccines / remedies (but not available to one's enemies) are prerequisites for a biowarfare agent.

Something that this article / batch of documents glosses over: The outbreak supposedly started in December of 2019, but in October or November of that year, Western intelligence sources were already reporting that an illness had hit WIV employees. This is according to articles I read around May / June of 2020.

To me, these circumstantial things work together to conclusively show that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from WIV. They had an outbreak on-site shortly before the virus was supposedly spread at the wet market. By most accounts, WIV has an atrocious record of lapses. And lots of previously available data was suddenly unavailable at just the wrong time.

It DOES NOT show that the virus was created there, nor does it foreclose the possibility that the COVID-19 virus will eventually be found in bat guano at the bottom of some cave somewhere.

I should note that I don't consider The Sun (neither US edition nor its UK parent) a reliable source. But BBC and Reuters are reliable.