Your response is a bit confusing, so I'm assuming what you mean is that you believe physically isolating high BSL labs in remote areas is a clear and obvious wa

Your response is a bit confusing, so I'm assuming what you mean is that you believe physically isolating high BSL labs in remote areas is a clear and obvious way to mitigate that risk? And that COVID was a warning that we should do more of that? And that scientists are ignoring that warning? In which case, all of that is predicating on this actually being a lab leak. But there is no "bury head in sand" option. Eventually something as transmissible and much more lethal is going to spread. At that point, it's too late. The reason SARS-CoV-2 had a vaccine a year later is because of previous work in exactly these sorts of facilities. BSL labs are the safest places on the planet to work on dangerous pathogens. They aren't perfect. We should continually work to make them more perfect, and fund them to be so. But they're already multiple orders of magnitude more secure biologically than the alternates. Any country on the planet can work with any dangerous pathogens they can get ahold of. In any way they want. You can only set standards, contribute foreign aid to fund improvement, and try to improve the safety level of the global community. The "lab leak possibility means we shouldn't do lab research" argument feels like the suggestion that after Nagasaki the world should have abandoned nuclear weapons and ceased research. In which case, we'd be living under the flag of whichever country ignored that and pursued it anyway.