I honestly want to know what changed so suddenly such that it's now okay to discuss the lab leak hypothesis in polite company. The proximate cause? Probably th

I honestly want to know what changed so suddenly such that it's now okay to discuss the lab leak hypothesis in polite company. The proximate cause? Probably the reporting of Nicholas Wade, whose article is targeted at the mainstream and which brings together some pretty hefty and complex topics around lab leaks in an accessible way. https://nicholaswade.medium.com/origin-of-covid-following-the-clues-6f03564c038 https://nicholaswade.medium.com/origin-of-covid-following-th... If you look at the sources he cites, they're not really accessible to the mainstream. Yuri Deigin's essay for example is 34 pages printed out and filled with dense micro-biological evidence. You have to be really dedicated to read the whole thing. Wade's article is also very long but at only 15 pages, it's still much more accessible. It also brings together a lot of different strands of evidence into a coherent and convincing narrative. I don't think anyone can read it and not be left with a deep impression of suspicious scientific wrongdoing. Additionally, lab leaks were first being discussed and dismissed a year ago. In the last year a lot of people have to come to realize just how unreliable public health researchers actually are. Some very well educated people learned that not only can they read the scientific papers forming public policy directly, but that when they do they keep discovering really huge mistakes and/or outright manipulations. So a lot of people who would previously have loyally dismissed any suggestion of scientific malpractice are newly open to the possibility. And yeah then there's the Trump effect.