It's all up for debate now, but the wildlife hypothesis gains its plausibility from the similarity of SARS-CoV2's similarity to coronaviruses in pangolins sold

It's all up for debate now, but the wildlife hypothesis gains its plausibility from the similarity of SARS-CoV2's similarity to coronaviruses in pangolins sold in China's wildlife trade. The wild animal/bushmeat trade is considered responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak as well as HIV, so it's certainly plausible it spread through wet markets (although probably not the specific Wuhan wet market it was initially discovered in). TBH, the lab leak hypothesis should seem less damaging to the Chinese government's reputation than the wet market hypothesis. On one hand, you have an isolated failure of lab safety protocols, on the other, you have decades of government support of wild animal trade despite mountains of evidence for its risk of zoonotic disease outbreak, not to mention environmental costs.