Here's a sub-headline:
If you're browsing the article only checking headlines you might think that "Most experts push back on lab leak theory".
From that section:
Anthony, also of Columbia, echoed Racaniello's skepticism of the wet-market theory.
Perhaps, the most forceful rejection of the wet-market theory came from Ebright of Rutgers.
Ebright also isn't ready to rule out the theory of the two Chinese researchers that the virus may have "leaked" from one of two labs near the Wuhan market, although one of the authors told The Wall Street Journal they withdrew the paper because it "was not supported by direct proofs."
The experts appear to dislike the wet-market theory. Which is also the case in the withdrawn paper cited in my older article. That;'s not surprising. But, what about the lab leak?
The only other section that talks about lab leak theory says this:
But one of the labs cited in the paper, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, issued a statement on February 19 that strongly rejected any suggestion that the virus originated from its lab.
The statement said the theory that the virus leaked from the lab was one of the false rumors that had "great damaged our frontline researchers and seriously disrupted our urgent scientific research." Other rumors it rejected include "virus was man-made," "Patient Zero came from the institute" and "Chinese military took control of the institute."
Wow, so, the lab denies it! Despite their cited expert saying that he won't rule it out. I guess that solves that. Thanks, CNN!