I did but the article is very poorly written. The explicit statement that Nicholas Wade is not a racist appears both as the first sentence - unquoted i.e. this

I did but the article is very poorly written. The explicit statement that Nicholas Wade is not a racist appears both as the first sentence - unquoted i.e. this is not reported speech but a statement by the article author - and in the abstract at the top, also not in quotes. But then it starts by mis-representing his argument by saying he "explains why white people are better because of their genes" and in the very next sentence admits that "to be fair" that's not actually what he said at all. We are left deliberately confused about both what the author of the article and the author of the book actually think. For example you wrote: Nicholas Wade is the one making the claim he's not racist. "It's not prejudice; it's science." and you put that statement in quotes to imply that Wade is the one who said it, but in fact, it's the article author who wrote that statement, not Wade! I don't fully understand where you see a racial tinge in the lab creation theory. The lab is in China but beyond that it has nothing to do with being Chinese. And as Wade and others document, the money came from US research agencies and GOF research is done in multiple countries, so again, I don't see any racial connection. If Wade was actually a racist I guess he'd not miss this golden opportunity to blame the apparently lax Chinese lab practices on their DNA, but he makes no such argument anywhere, not even about culture.