> This statement sounds very disingenuous I don't agree. The lab leak theory has a disproportionate share of the public discourse's space compared to it's scie

> This statement sounds very disingenuous I don't agree. The lab leak theory has a disproportionate share of the public discourse's space compared to it's scientific plausibility. So it's time to turn down (not off) the rhetoric, and evaluate all hypothesis in a scientific way. You will notice at no point in the article do they say that non-natural hypothesis should not be investigated, quite the opposite: > "[...] whether it occurred wholly within nature or might somehow have reached the community via an alternative route, and prevent future pandemics."