Comparing wet market vs. lab escape based on numbers of each isn't that useful to analyze. For one thing, those are far from the only places the virus could ha

Comparing wet market vs. lab escape based on numbers of each isn't that useful to analyze. For one thing, those are far from the only places the virus could have jumped to humans. (In fact, investigations of early cases in Wuhan show that while the market appears to be the site of a super spreader event, it wasn't the origin of the spread of the virus in humans.) Also, by comparing counts of wet markets and bio labs, you ignore that the likelihood of spread from each are not comparable -- they'd have to have something like the same order of magnitude of likelihood for your analysis to have meaning. Obviously, that's rather unlikely to be true. > You can't conclude anything with absolute certainty doing this kind of probabilistic analysis I don't think you can conclude anything from your analysis considering all the holes in it.