Because the people most directly involved are dead (e.g. staff from the wuhan lab) and records have either been lost or concealed it'll probably never be possib

Because the people most directly involved are dead (e.g. staff from the wuhan lab) and records have either been lost or concealed it'll probably never be possible to prove a 'lab leak' one way or another. If you look at the defuse project proposal, however, you'll see a proposal that a reasonable person would conclude had a high risk of creating SARS-CoV2. They proposed to take a bad corona virus and attempt to grow versions that infected humans by growing it in humanized mice. If that failed, they proposed to genetically modify it to insert a furin cleavage site. After getting their humanized virus they intended to expose immune boosted wild bats to it to inoculate them to this 'predicted' virus. The biggest discrepancy is that SARS-CoV2's closest known ancestor isn't the virus they were proposing to study: instead, the nearest ancestor is the virus the lab was working on immediately prior to the defuse proposal. And CoV2's most conspicious difference from the wild type ancestor is the furin cleavage whos sequence is very distant from the virus and would not likely be produced easily through mutation yet happens to be identical to a sequence in the literature prior to the research. Even if we had absolutely concrete proof that SARS-CoV2's origin was completely natural since the research proposals obviously could have created it there ought to be serious inquiry and policy review-- because if it wasn't man made it seems like it would only be by good luck. We have been playing with fire.